pissedonpolitics

I am sick of this fucking shit

I don't care who you are or what you are, you CANNOT violate The Constitution and CLAIM to be an American at the same time.

I am sick of all these fuck heads like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) who advocate having Congress simply bless Bush's illegal procedures.

I am also sick and tired of those who attack the patriotism of those that support the recent Supreme Court Decision on Gitmo.

What part of freedom and liberty do you not understand wingnuts? What part of The Constitution and Declaration of Independents does not compute with you assholes?

I tell you what wingnuts, I will die defending The Constitution, will you? I will spill my blood to make sure you kooky wingnuts do not destroy America.

What the fuck are you pussy wingnuts so afraid of? This is America. We are fucking Americans. We believe in truth, justice, freedom, and the American Way. We are not going to let some schmoe from Texas strut in to D.C. and just scrap all The Truths we hold to be self-evident.

I guarantee that the Majority of Americans support The Constitution and will defend it. I guarantee that the Majority of Americans are willing to fight and die in order to preserve our Democracy and our way of life. Just as our forefathers (and mothers) did before us, so shall we fight against Tyranny.

America is larger than anyone that is alive. America is an idea founded upon the sacred document, The Constitution. This document has successfully navigated our country through 217 years of history. No conflict has been great enough to cause America to lose faith in its institutions and The Constitution. Not the Civil War, not two world wars, not The Great Depression.

We Americans are certainly not about to allow some "War on Terror" or "terrorism" scare us in to giving up our Constitutional Rights as Americans. And we are certainly not about to use this so called "War on Terror" as an excuse to stop behaving like Americans.

America is not about torture, it's not about rape, or sicking dogs on people. It's not about holding people in Gitmo without due process. America is not about violating the Geneva Conventions.

America is America and no amount of Bush Sycophantic wingnut propaganda can change that.

Try all you want wingnuts. When it comes to blows you will be outnumbered and you will die. This is America not some Nazi reincarnated country as you wish it to be.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

Bush IS The Law

Silly Supreme Court, you can't tell a dictator what to do. The Dictator is The Law. He's also above the laws he enacts himself.

Bush will push new laws on detainees

Washington correspondent Geoff Elliott

July 01, 2006

THE Bush administration is expected to propose new legislation to try to establish lawful military trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees, including David Hicks, after the US Supreme Court declared the existing military tribunals illegal.

Some Republicans in Congress, where the party holds a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, have indicated they would support new legislation.

Continue Reading

We're reaching a critical point here folks. Bush is almost past the point of no return into Fascism.

I hope there are Minute Men and Women out there, (the True Patriots not these wingnut pretenders) willing to once again take up arms at a momments notice. It will be up to us to defend The Constitution when Bush declares it Null and Void.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBacks (0)

Big Oil: The Truth comes out about high gas prices

We have all known something was up with the high gas prices. We knew something smelled rotten. We understood that tensions in the Middle East, Katrina, an Oil Man in the White House, and lack of refining capacity could have been contributing to the high oil prices.

But when the Oil Companies kept turing in record profits, something didn't compute. Where was the money going? It's not like it costs the Oil Companies more money to produce that barrel of oil. It's not like the Oil Companies are pouring all their profit in to exploration, building more refineries, and improving supply lines in order to secure America's energy needs.

Well, now we can rest easy knowing why Big Oil and Government have colluded to fuck us over at the pump once again.

House approves bill to lift ban on offshore drilling

By Larry Wheeler, Gannett News Service

WASHINGTON — Anxious to show voters back home that Congress can do something about high gas prices, House lawmakers approved legislation Thursday that would expand drilling for oil and natural gas off most of the U.S. coast and Alaska.

The bill, which passed on a 232-187 vote, would end a ban on new domestic offshore drilling that for 25 years confined such activity almost exclusively to the western and central Gulf of Mexico.
#

"Americans are desperate for real energy solutions," said Lydia Weiss, a lobbyist for Defenders of Wildlife. "These are not real energy solutions. Drilling off shore will not help meet our energy needs. "

Those concerns seemed to carry little weight as bill supporters anticipated victory during the afternoon debate.

"Show me a natural gas well that has ever polluted a beach," said Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa., one of the primary authors of the legislation. "This country cannot compete in the global marketplace without affordable natural gas. Natural gas is a commodity this country is rich in and the Outer Continental Shelf is loaded."

Continue Reading

It's the 1970's all over. We have rampant inflation and runaway gas prices. Only this time, the motivation is not getting legislation through Congress to allow for the building of the Alaska Pipeline. This time it's to get Congress to ok offshore oil drilling ubiquitously off the coast of the U.S.

Either way it's about greed, profit, and maintaining oil as our primary energy source rather than focusing on developing alternatives.

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

According to Wingnut Logic, Bush is a Traitor

It's been another episode of Wingnuts Gone Wild this past week as any and every wingnut in America including President Bush have been making the media rounds calling the New York Times traitors.

Wingnut logic argues that the New York Times wich "disclosed" Bush's secret bank monitoring program aimed at tracking terrorists' financial transactions and that because of this "disclosure" by The Times we are less likely to find terrorist funds therefore giving them more opportunity to attack us.

The problem with wingnut logic is that Bush had already many years ago let it be known that we were going to track the finances of terrorists. Bush said as much in his 9/20/01 Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People:

"We ask every nation to join us. We will ask, and we will need, the help of police forces, intelligence services, and banking systems around the world." - President Bush 9/20/2001

Well, then using wingnut logic Bush should be tried for treason. Bush publically announced to the terrorists that we were going to track their finances! Oh my! But it doesn't stop there.

Dan Froomkin writes in the Washington Post in a column titled A SWIFT Kick in the Head:
#
When asked to back up the White House accusation that a recent New York Times story put American lives at risk by disclosing vital secrets to terrorists, the best press secretary Tony Snow could do yesterday was this: "I am absolutely sure they didn't know about SWIFT."

SWIFT, the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, is the international banking cooperative that quietly allowed the Treasury Department and the CIA to examine hundreds of thousands of private banking records from around the world.

But the existence of SWIFT itself has not exactly been a secret. Certainly not to anyone who had an Internet connection.

SWIFT has a Web site, at swift.com .

It's a very informative Web site.

It's a very informative Web site. For instance, this page describes how "SWIFT has a history of cooperating in good faith with authorities such as central banks, treasury departments, law enforcement agencies and appropriate international organisations, such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), in their efforts to combat abuse of the financial system for illegal activities."
(And yes, FATF has its own Web site, too.)

#

hmm, so the super duber uber double dog secret program disclosed by the New York Times has a website and advertises that they cooperate in good faith with authorities and law enforment agencies? Oh my God! The Traitors! Quick someone alert Hannity & O'Reilly so they can have a Wonder Twin Powers Activate momment!

This was posted on Democratic Underground:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timelin...

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the anti-money-laundering cause has sprung back to life. The Bush Administration, which is trying to hunt down Osama bin Laden's cash in tax havens and secret bank accounts, has suddenly got religion about tracking down terrorists' assets, know-your-customer laws for banks and an array of other tools on law enforcement's wish list.

The antiterrorism bill the Bush Administration sponsored, augmented by tough money-laundering provisions proposed by Democrats, sailed through the Senate. But late last week House Republican leaders Dick Armey and Tom Delay thwarted efforts to include an anti-money-laundering bill in the chamber's antiterrorism legislation, sources tell TIME, endangering the entire banking reform effort.

#

What? So Tom Delay and Dick Armey are traitors too? I tell you what, if wingnuts want Congress to go after traitors (which by wingnut logic is anyone who in their opinion increases their risk of being attacked by a terrorist) then they better get cracking. There are a whole lotta traitors to round up.

Wingnuts, you should start with President Bush. After all, he was the first one to disclose that the U.S. was tracking the finances of terrorists. Secondly, President Bush and the whole Bush Crime Family have very close ties to Saudi Arabia. It is well known that Saudi Arabi funds many of the terrorist outfits in the world. If Bush wanted to, he could ask his Saudi friends to knock it off but he won't.

Further, the Bush Crime family has business ties to the Bin Laden family. If Bush really wanted to track the finances of the terrorists all he would have to do is hand over the banking records of his entire family as well as his friends at the Carlyle Group.

Posted by PoliShifter at 01:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

Insurgents agree to halt attacks if US leaves Iraq in 2 years

Hell No! Bush ain't not cut and runner! He'd assume see more U.S. Troops killed than cut and run from Iraq just to appease the insurgents. Why, it would positiviely hurt his swagger if he took the deal. He might get perceived as a pussy; a Dictator cannot be perceived as weak and The Decider knows this.

Besides, using wingnut logic this would only embolden Al Qaeda. After all, we know that Bush's number one priority is catching Osama Bin Laden and destroying Al Qaeda...

Insurgents offer to halt attacks in Iraq

By STEVEN R. HURST and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writers

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Eleven Sunni insurgent groups have offered an immediate halt to all attacks — including those on American troops — if the United States agrees to withdraw foreign forces from Iraq in two years, insurgent and government officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

Withdrawal is the centerpiece of a set of demands from the groups, which operate north of Baghdad in the heavily Sunni Arab provinces of Salahuddin and Diyala. Although much of the fighting has been to the west, those provinces are increasingly violent and attacks there have crippled oil and commerce routes.

The groups who've made contact have largely shunned attacks on Iraqi civilians, focusing instead on the U.S.-led coalition forces. Their offer coincides with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's decision to reach out to the Sunni insurgency with a reconciliation plan that includes an amnesty for fighters.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 01:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Politics Predicate Bush's decisions and attitude toward Iraq

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was and continues to be a conscious choice by the Bush Administration as opposed to a reaction to circumstance.

After we were attacked on 9/11 by Al Qaeda, rather than seek to do what was in the best interest of the American People, the Bush Administration opted to fully exploit 9/11 for the political fruit it could yield.

Afghanistan was the logical target as was Osama Bin Laden. After a feable attempt at catching Osama Bin Laden and squashing Al Qadea, the Bush Administration turned its full attention to Iraq; a country that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.

The decision to invade Iraq was predicated by a political desire the Bush Administration needed fulfilled. Bush wanted desperately to be a War Time President. Not just for ego and bravado, but also to help justify the Administration’s advocation for the granting of Carte Blanche power to The Executive.

Afghanistan could not have given the Bush Administration the long, protracted, bloody quagmire that Iraq could. Catching Bin Laden and destroying Al Qaeda as well as the Taliban also would have worked against the Bush Administration. A never ending war was desired in order to justify the fascification of the United States in such a manner that the citizenry would accept it.

Hence now the “War on Terror” and the protracted occupation of Iraq. It was a political decision with devious political motivation. There was no evidence that Saddam had reconstituted his nuclear program. Saddam had no ties to Al Qaeda, 9/11, or Osama Bin Laden. There was no evidence that Saddam was an imminent threat to the United States.

The case Bush and Cheney presented to the American People was pure bullshit based on faulty, ginned up intelligence reports on Iraq from dubious sources. The motivation was pure and simple; get the United States in a war that could not be won during the Bush Administration’s tenure.

The purpose is truly multifaceted. One part was maintaining the Presidency. This was key to the Administration so they would be able to continue to execute their NeoCon agenda. Rove knew that if Bush was a “war time President”, a “Commander-in-Chief” if you will, that American common sense would dictate that we should not change horses in mid-stream. Indeed, this became a popular wingnut talking point during 2004.

The other part of the benefits to the Bush Administration involving the Iraq War revolve around being able to use Iraq and the War on Terror as an excuse to justify giving Bush “special war powers”. Basically, the Administration wanted and got the ability to break any and every law, civil liberty, and tradition established by our Constitution and our Congress without fear of having to answer to any body of power or be held accountable.

Bush has expanded the power of the Executive to unprecedented levels. Bush has become above the law, and for all pratical purposes, a Dictator. Expansion of the meaning and intention of signing statements have made it possible for Bush to ignore laws passed by Congress; laws that you and I must obey.

More importantly however is the fact that Iraq remains a political football that is still in play for the Bush Administration. The Bush Administration has been clever in their lack of strategy and attention paid to Iraq. They basically have made sure that the majority of Americans have not had to make any sacrifices in the name of the occupation of Iraq. Bush has done this by cutting taxes and borrowing money in order to fund the occupation.

Our military force in Iraq is relatively small, about 130,000. This serves two purposes: One, this means that the Iraq War is only really directly affecting about 600,000 Americans. Two, with a small military force Bush pretty much guarranted that Iraq would not become stable or peaceful. Enough bloodshed would occur in order to jusify keeping our troops there but not so much that The Public's stomach would sour to the occupation.

I guess we did learn some lessons from Vietnam, albeit the wrong lessons. With no draft, no sacrifice by Americans on a large scale, and a relatively low number of American Families who are directly experiencing the tragedy and horror of war, the Bush Administration has ensured that there won’t be a popular uprising against the occupation of Iraq.

Bush has been able to drain massive amounts of capital out of our treasury and divert it to his cronies all in the name of War. Bush has also been able to rack up our debt and plunge us in to deficit spending all in the name of his war.

And now that the occupation in Iraq is getting somewhat unpopular with Americans, Bush can announce to America that we will be withdrawing *some* troops, conveniently before the November elections, just enough to pacify the public’s angst over the occupation.

The occupation from start to it’s never ending finish was designed by choice to be a never ending occupation that serves as a political tool for Republicans. We have no intention of leaving Iraq. We have no intention of rebuilding Iraq. We have no intention of creating stability in Iraq. What the Bush Administration and the Republicans want is controlled chaos. What Republicans want is a political tool that basically allows them to keep winning elections, pass any laws they see fit, hold The President above the law, and raid our treasury for their own purpose and ill-gotten gain.

Posted by PoliShifter at 04:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yes, I AM Fucking Angry

Al Franken had on David Brock of Media Matters to discuss last week's claim by Rick Santorum that WMDs have been found in Iraq.

And yes I got extremely angry. I get sick and tired of listening to Fuck Heads like Hannity, Gibson, O'Reilly, Gingrich, Limbaugh, Hume, Angle, and Kristol make these bullshit claims that WMD have been found in Iraq. I get even more tired of them trying to extort Democrats into appologizing to President Bush for calling him a liar.

When Bush and Cheney sold the invasion of Iraq to the American People they did not come before us and say:

"Uh, we know Saddam has WMDs from the late 80's that Rumsfeld had personally sold him. We know they are buried in the desert and are not potent anymore. Nevertheless we feel we should invade Iraq and secure those 20 year old WMDs"

Bush and Cheney made NO MENTION of twenty year old WMD being the reason for invading Iraq.

What Bush and Cheney did tell the American People was that they had evidence Saddam had reconstituted his nuclear weapons program. They also told the American People that Saddam was manufacturing chemical and biological weapons with plans to fly a UAV over the United States and attack us with them.

To this day we have found NO EVIDENCE that Saddam had reconstituted his nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons programs.

Do these winnuts think that the American People are stupid? Do they think we will forget what Bush told us (which is on the public record in living color) were the reasons for invading Iraq?

Perhaps some blame does lay with Democrats and bloggers. You see, wingnuts hang on words and depend redily on parsing sentences. They do not look at the overall picture for a view of the truth. What they do is hang on a few words. In this case the words were "found no WMD in Iraq".

Wingnuts can say "ah hah! But we did find WMD in Iraq! Ah ha ha! You MUST appologize!"

This is a bullshit argument and the American People know it. But from now on, for the sake of the wingnuts, I request that all Democrats and liberal bloggers say:

"we have found no evidence in Iraq that Saddam had reconstituted his any of his nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs as Bush and Cheney had asserted prior to the invasion of Iraq"

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBacks (0)

Congress Waisting Time Again

What a fucking waste of taxpayer time and dollars. Don't these guys have anything better to do?

GOP bill targets NY Times

By Patrick O’Connor and Jonathan Allen

House Republican leaders are expected to introduce a resolution today condemning The New York Times for publishing a story last week that exposed government monitoring of banking records.

The resolution is expected to condemn the leak and publication of classified documents, said one Republican aide with knowledge of the impending legislation.

The resolution comes as Republicans from the president on down condemn media organizations for reporting on the secret government program that tracked financial records overseas through the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT), an international banking cooperative.

Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.), working independently from his leadership, began circulating a letter to House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) during a late series of votes yesterday asking his leaders to revoke the Times’s congressional press credentials.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Putin wants hostages' killers hunted down

Somewhere Bush is saying to himself "why didn't I think of that?"

President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday ordered Russia's special services to hunt down and "destroy" the killers of four Russian diplomats in Iraq the Kremlin said.

Nikolai Patrushev, the head of the Federal Security Service — the main successor to the Soviet KGB — later said that everything would be done to ensure that the killers "do not escape from responsibility," the Interfax news agency reported.

"The president has ordered the special forces to take all necessary measures to find and destroy the criminals who killed Russian diplomats in Iraq," the Kremlin press service said in a brief statement.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Frauds impersonating decorated soldiers

Perhaps you have come across them before, I know I have both in the real world and the blogosphere. They are people who wear their military service on their sleeve overly eager to tell anyone who will listen of their exploits. In the blogosphere, many fall back on a claim to military service in the heat of an argument they are losing.

"I served my country proudly, how dare you say that The President misled us into war with Iraq..."

Many have pictures of themselves in military regalia on their blogs.

Well, check out how far this guy went:

Frauds put up a decorated front

By Gregg Zoroya, USA TODAY

The man cutting a path across the Marine Corps Birthday Ball near Atlantic City last fall wore row upon row of battle ribbons on his chest — silent testament to a history of gallantry and sacrifice.

Among the awards he wore were a Bronze Star, a Silver Star and the Navy Cross, which is second in significance only to the Medal of Honor.

Retired Marine Corps master sergeant Fred Montney III and others turned to admire Gerard Smigel, 52, in his dress blue uniform and wearing the rank of lieutenant colonel. "He was in his element. He enjoyed it," says Montney, who sat at Smigel's table.

As the night wore on, Montney noticed little flaws. Smigel would excuse himself to go to the "latrine." Marines call it the "head." Smigel wore one award, a Combat Action Ribbon, upside down. "When I asked him questions, he would get somewhat fuzzy" about details, Montney recalls. He snapped a photo of Smigel, smiling next to his wife, and later called the FBI.

Smigel pleaded guilty this month in federal court to illegally wearing the uniform and medals. He was sentenced to three years of probation and fined $3,000.

Masquerading as a war hero has become riskier — but more tempting — during this time of war. "Right now, most everybody loves the military, and that's why I'm seeing more and more of these impostors," says senior FBI agent Thomas Cottone.

The FBI has investigated 58 cases of people allegedly wearing fraudulent military decorations since 2001. Assisted by military researchers and the Internet — where hoaxes can be quickly tracked and exposed — the FBI could end up investigating more cases of medal fraud this year than in any other previous year, Cottone says. He says he gets one tip a week.

Continue Reading this story

I guess this is to be expected in a country ruled by chickenhawks who so desperately want to be viewed as war time heroes. Their supporters also want to be war heroes. It's very easy to want to play war like a child with green army men. It's another thing to actually fight in a war and be in the military.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

It's a Crime NOT to report a Crime

Think about that for a while wingnuts.

It's also a crime to aid and abet a criminal.

Wingnuts, you are all culpable in the criminal activities of the Bush Regime by your vehement defense of their documented crimes.

You better think twice before you start throwing words around like traitor.

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Democrats to Block Pay Raises for Congress until minimum wage is raised

CNN:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A week after the GOP-led Senate rejected an increase to the minimum wage, Senate Democrats on Tuesday vowed to block pay raises for members of Congress until the minimum wage is increased.

"We're going to do anything it takes to stop the congressional pay raise this year, and we're not going to settle for this year alone," Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said at a Capitol news conference.

"They can play all the games the want," Reid said derisively of the Republicans who control the chamber. "They can deal with gay marriage, estate tax, flag burning, all these issues and avoid issues like the prices of gasoline, sending your kid to college. But we're going to do everything to stop the congressional pay raise."

Continue Reading at CNN

Posted by PoliShifter at 06:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Why Doesn't Bush Slam the leak of General Casey's Cut and Run plan?

I wrote before about the wingnuts' feigned outrage at the New York Times for leaking Bush's Bank monitoring program. I also asked where the feigned wingnut outrage was over the leaking of General Casey's cut and run, I mean adjustable troop withdrawl plan. Much to my not surprise as I was looking at Google News, there was no mention of Bush being upset about General Casey's plan being leaked to the press.

But there is plenty about Bush being steamed up mad at the New York Times:

Bush Administration Clashes With Newspaper Over Anti-Terror ...Voice of America - 2 hours agoBy Jim Malone. President Bush's choice to be the next Treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, promised the Senate Tuesday that he will review a previously secret program to track terrorists through an international banking database. ...

Bush slams leak of terror finance story Leading The Charge
Bush Says Report on Bank Data Was Disgraceful New York Times
Bank data story harms US: Bush Times of India
Bush calls disclosure `disgraceful' Chicago Tribune
President Bush Takes on The New York Times and Other Committed ...

Where is Bush's outrage at the leaking of General Casey's plan? Or is Bush's Outrage only limited to those things that do not politically benefit him?

And why isn't Bush outraged at himself for being a lawbreaker?

Posted by PoliShifter at 04:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Congress Doing Important Work

Spending their time on Flag Burning is clearly in the best interest of the American People.

Posted by PoliShifter at 04:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Did Rush Limbaugh have a Sex Vacation?

In a previous post titled Rush Limbaugh Detained At Airport Kenny asked the question in the comment section:

Why did Rush Limbaugh go to the Dominican Republic with Viagra?

Kenny pointed out that a quick google or yahoo search of the Dominican Republic and sex illustrates the country's burgeoning Sex Vacation Industry.

Now, I don't know what Rush's official explanation will be. No doubt whatever he says, his ditto head fan base will believe.

Common sense dictates however that if you go on vacation and make sure to pack your Viagra, something is going to happen involving sex either with yourself or someone else.

The question is, where did Rush go?

I'm guessing Sinsation was his destination.

Although Rush is kind of a dirty bastard so he may have preferred Black Beard's Adult Resort.

If I was the place Rush stayed I would use it as advertising: "The Adult Sex Vacation Destination Choice of Rush Limbaugh!"

And remember folks, just because you can say "Family Values" doesn't mean you actually have "Family Values"...

Another important question to ask is:

How many Viagra Pills did Rush Limbaugh take to the Dominican Republic?

How many Viagra Pills did Rush Limbaugh come back to the States with?

Ode To Rush Limbaugh

Girls or women, boys or men
Lady boys or shemales
Maybe LBFM's

What is Rush Limbaugh's Preference
Where did the Viagra go
How much Viagra did he bring with him
How much did he bring home

Rush Limbaugh: Wood On Loan From God

Rush Limbaugh, sex tourist?

Rush Limbaugh jokes about Viagra find

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBacks (0)

Quick Thought

Flipping through the TV news today it seems the debate has shifted away from "staying the course" and instead is about WHEN we are going to leave Iraq as well as how.

I consider this a victory for Democrats and The American People. Even though Republicans are trying to frame this debate to favor themselves, I don't think The American People are just going to forget how Republicans screamed at Democrats calling them coward cut and runners.

The debate is not longer about "staying the course" indefinately thereby fulfilling Bush's dream of Empire.

It has been settled. We need to get out of Iraq and everyone knows it. When and how are what is to be decided. Score one for Democrats.

What Demcrats need to do now is remind The American People that getting out of Iraq was a Democrat idea all along, that Murtha predicted there would be a miraculous troop withdraw right around the November elections, and that Politics predicate Bush's Iraq Policy. Bush will only act on Iraq when it suits his political needs. Bush will only do in Iraq what is beneficial to him politically.

In this case, Republicans winning the mid-term elections is all Bush cares about.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Rush Limbaugh Detained At Airport

Druggy Limbaugh at it again!

Courtesy of Eschaton via Talking Points Memo courtesy of:

CBS 4

Limbaugh Detained At Airport

Joy Purdy
Reporting

(CBS4 News) WEST PALM BEACH

Sources have confirmed to CBS4 News that conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh has been detained at Palm Beach International Airport for the possible possession of illegal prescription drugs Monday evening.

Limbaugh was returning on a flight from the Dominican Republic when officials found the drugs, among them Viagra.

Updates:

Limbaugh detained at Palm Beach airport

#
ICE officials found in Limbaugh's luggage a prescription bottle labeled as Viagra, a prescription drug that treats erectile disfunction, Miller said.

"The problem was that on the bottle itself was not his name, but the name of two Florida doctors," Miller said.

The matter was turned over to the sheriff's office, whose investigators interviewed Limbaugh.

"He said he had the Viagra in his possession for his use and that he did obtain it from his doctors," Miller said.

Sheriff's investigators confiscated the drugs, and Limbaugh was released around 5:30 p.m. without being charged.

However, the sheriff's office plans to file a report with the state attorney's office.

"We believe there may be a second degree misdemeanor violation, which is possession of certain drugs without a prescription, because the bottle does not have his name on it," Miller said.

Read Full Article

#

Reflections:

The problem with liars is, when do you know when they are telling the truth?

What is Rush going to say tommorow (or the next day or whenever he is back onthe radio)?

"My Friends there is a perfectly valid explanation for this mishap that happened at the airport...none of which ofcourse the liberals don't want to listen to, but that is beside the point...Anyway, we all know how Democrats don't deal in facts so it doesn't surprise me that Demorats are filled with schadenfraude over this misunderstanding...At that is what it is simple as that! Just a misundertanding. This is what the liberals and democrats don't get. You see you have to have your facts in order to get at the truth. And the fact of the matter is that liberals once again have completely distorted and overblown this misunderstanding. I wasn't "arrested". I wasn't "detained" as the liberals would have you believe. No, I was routinely questioned by a few nice officers down at the airport and once this misunderstading was cleared up I went home...That's all I'm going to say about that...Now, about these liberal Democrats who keep putting us at risk for another terrorist attack..."

Update 2:

Crooks and Liars has some video of Keith Olbermann up.

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBacks (0)

Attention Wingnuts: Where is your feigned outrage now?

In a previous post I wrote about the wingnuts' feigned outrage over the leaking of information on Bush's sercret monitoring of banking transactions. Many wingnuts publically called for the New York Times and LA Times to be tried for treason. Agitprop rounded up the usual suspects and framed them with their own words.

I was listening to Sam Seder today who is filling in for Randi Rhodes and he brought up a great point.

This new cut'n'run strategy being embraced by the Bush Administration was supposed to be top secret but it was leaked to the New York Times:
#
According to a classified briefing at the Pentagon this week by the commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the number of American combat brigades in Iraq is projected to decrease to 5 or 6 from the current level of 14 by December 2007.
#
Calling all wingnuts! Where is your outrage now! This was a classified briefing wrecklessly leaked to the traitorous New York Times! Advertising that the Bush Administration and our military are embracing a cut'n'run approach to Iraq is just going to embolden the terrorists! Wingnuts unite against the traitors!

And while you're at it, you may want to call for trying BushCo for treason since they are the ones embracing this cut'n'run policy from Iraq. This is going to put us in more danger from being hit again by the terrorists when wingnut logic is applied.

Where's the outrage? Where's Malkin, Coulter, Bennett, Limbaugh and Hannity denouncing the traitorous New York Times for disclosing Bush's cut'n'run policy? Where's the concern that this move by Bush will only embolden the terrorists? Where is the worry that because this classified information was leaked to the New York Times, we are mow more at risk of being attacked?

Hmm, it seems that the wingnut outrage only applies when the leak or perceived bias seems to support a Democrat's position. If it supports a Republican, Wingnut, NeoCon, Conservative, or Bush Sycophant position, then the leak just doesn't matter. In fact, in these cases the leaks are justified according to wingnut logic cause it just sticks it to those damn liberals.

Update: Crooks and Liars has video of an unhinged wingnut, Chris Baker, feigning his outrage at the New York Times for disclosing Bush's Super Uber Duper Dog secret bank transaction monitoring program.

I wonder, is Chris Baker upset about the New York Times disclosing Bush's Cut and Run policy? He should be...after all, doesn't it just put us in the crosshairs of the terrorists?

Posted by PoliShifter at 03:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

The Swift Boating Of Murtha Begins

Well, we knew it was coming. When Ann Coulter suggested Rep. John Murtha (D - Penn) should be fragged only to be applauded and defended by her wingnut counter parts, it was just a matter of time before the swift boat gang jumped on board.

BootMurtha.com was supposed to be MurthaLied.Com but the webmaster got so many emails that she decided to buy the bootmurtha.com domain name instead. The site is underconstruction and reads more like a scorned love-sick teen at the momment rather a swiftboater site. Give it time to mature.

Amanda Doss, swift-boater in-training writes:

"...shortly after I purchased the domain name MurthaLied.com, my personal information (including where I live, my picture, my client list, and my email address) was posted on several "Liberal" blogs. Keep in mind, this information was posted BEFORE I had even created a website for MurthaLied.com. [sounds like she didn't buy the security packages from godaddy.com when she made her initial purchase...cheapskate! Also, she should talk to her webhosting service about their privacy policy. And by the by, using wingnut logic, if you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't mind having your personal info out there.]

I would like to share some of hateful and even threatening emails I have recently received due to these blogs, before this website was even created. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, please feel free to email these "sweethearts" and let them know how proud of them you are for the way they represent the Democratic party."

You can read the emails at BootMurtha.com. I read them. I have gotten worse from wingnuts and read much worse from Malkinites and Coulterites. I've heard Rush say worse things.

Ok...Here is one email that has Amanda's ire:

Hi

I've got a great idea. Why don't YOU go to Iraq? You seem to take joy in the killing of innocent "brown people", so why are you here in this country making websites eh? Too much of a sissy to stand up for what you allegedly believe in? Or too much of a total windbag pussy to put your money where your lying mouth is?

Come on Amanda!

Just as Murtha said about Rove, you sit in your air-conditioned trailer-home in Texarkana, telling the troops we'll "stay the course". You're wrong. They will do the fighting, they will do the killing and they will do the dying. While you, waste our air, pollute our politics, and lie your conniving and ugly and slowly deteriorating face off.

Go fuck yourself. Better yet, prepare for the swiftboating we're about to do to you!
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Somone needs to call a waaambulance for Amanda.

I agree:

"I've got a great idea. Why don't YOU go to Iraq? You seem to take joy in the killing of innocent "brown people", so why are you here in this country making websites eh? Too much of a sissy to stand up for what you allegedly believe in? Or too much of a total windbag pussy to put your money where your lying mouth is? "

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Democrats Fire Back

Well, at least some Democratic Senators got a little press. I hope the irony is not lost on the American Public that while Republicans called Democrats cut'n'runners and cowards, they secretly knew a cut'n'run plan was coming out of the Bush Administration just in time for November. This should really be no surprise. Murtha has said publically several times that there would be a miraculous troop draw down just before the elections in November.

Only in the Republican's case they will call it "Adjustable Troop Withdrawal " instead of what it really is: Cut and Run Republican Style.

From the Washington Post:

Senate Democrats reacted angrily to a report yesterday that the U.S. commander in Iraq had privately presented a plan for significant troop reductions in the same week they came under attack by Republicans for trying to set a timetable for withdrawal.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said that the plan attributed to Gen. George W. Casey resembles the thinking of many Democrats who voted for a nonbinding resolution to begin a troop drawdown in December. That resolution was defeated on a largely party-line vote in the Senate on Thursday.

"That means the only people who have fought us and fought us against the timetable, the only one still saying there shouldn't be a timetable really are the Republicans in the United States Senate and in the Congress," Boxer said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "Now it turns out we're in synch with General Casey."

Sen. Carl M. Levin (Mich.), one of the two sponsors of the nonbinding resolution, which offered no pace or completion date for a withdrawal, said the report is another sign of what he termed one of the "worst-kept secrets in town" -- that the administration intends to pull out troops before the midterm elections in November.

"It shouldn't be a political decision, but it is going to be with this administration," Levin said on "Fox News Sunday." "It's as clear as your face, which is mighty clear, that before this election, this November, there's going to be troop reductions in Iraq, and the president will then claim some kind of progress or victory."

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Wingnuts feign outrage at the New York Times

Agitprop does a brilliant job rounding up comments from conservative bloggers who are calling for the New York Times and LA Times to be tried as traitors. Why? Because they had the audacity to print an article on another one of Bush's many super uber double dog duper secret programs. This time the disclosed program tracks banking records.

And once again, the "conservatives" as they call themselves are outraged not at BushCo but at the press! That's right, conservatives who once upon a time considered themselves small government adovcates are upset. These same conservatives who in the past used to get outraged over government intusion in to our lives are now instead outraged that government obtrusiveness is being disclosed to the public.

Agitprop has quotes and links from over 30 wingnut blogs. Take a gander if you need a good simulatneous laugh and cry.

Here's a sampling of wingnuttery exposed by Agitprop:

American Thinker - Pinch Sulzberger is a traitor and satanic and an attention seeker, and he and the NYT should be prosecuted, and they can be, but maybe they can't be ... shit, where's the statute books?

Atlas Shrugs - the NYT traitors and the leakers should be pursued and jailed 'cause they put us in mortal mortal danger, and that's even worse than mortal danger!

Blue Crab Boulevard - someone should publish the NYT's floorplan, then maybe some terrorists will kill them, and that'd show 'em!

Bullwinkle Blog - if the NYT wasn't goin' bankrupt, we'd want them jailed and drawn and quartered and murdered and killed, but they're goin' bankrupt ... aren't they?

Captain's Quarters - the NYT is full of traitors, and their readers are idiots, and they shouldn't have released details of a program everybody including the terrorists knows exists anyway.

But what struck me even more was what Malkin is doing. She's calling all wingnuts to remake some WW2 propaganda posters...as if this is a new idea. Project for the OLD American Century has been doing this for years.

But what is exremely ironic is this poster Malkin is flaunting on her blog:

Now I do not doubt the wingnuts' desire to catch Osama Bin Laden. But the irony is here that they are supporting an Administration and its propaganda that absolutely refuses to catch Bin Laden. We have a President who doesn't care where Bin Laden is and doesn't spend that much time on him.

We invaded Afghanistan and for a time had Bin Laden in our sights. But BushCo turned their attention to Iraq and in doing so let Bin Laden get away. Further, we know Bin Laden is in the border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. So do we have 130,000 troops in this region trying to "smoke out" Bin Laden? Absolutely not. We have 130,000 troops in Iraq and about 15,000 in Afghanistan.

I think the opperative part of this poster is "this man MAY die". In other words, if you don't shut your mouth, this man may still die. One thing is certain, Bin Laden won't die while Bush is President unless it is of natural causes because Bush has no interest in catching Bin Laden. Bin Laden is too valuable to Bush alive. The Bin Laden boogey man allows Bush to manipulate and control sycophants such as Malkin and the 101st Fighting Keyboardists.

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Republicans and Bush going on a Scorched Earth campaign

It may be over as soon as it began if voters wake up this fall. Sensing a narrowing window of opportunity, Bush and the GOP are looking to destroy what is left of our dying democracy. The casualties will be the environment, civil rights, civil liberties, health services, education, and voting rights.

From Bushgreenwatch.org

White House, GOP Leaders Plan All-Out Assault on Federal Protections

Apparently rushing to lock in a long-sought goal before the fall elections, GOP congressional leaders may bring to a vote within weeks a proposal that could literally wipe out any federal program that protects public health or the environment--or for that matter civil rights, poverty programs, auto safety, education, affordable housing, Head Start, workplace safety or any other activity targeted by anti-regulatory forces.

With strong support from the Bush White House and the Republican Study Committee, the proposal would create a "sunset commission"--an unelected body with the power to recommend whether a program lives or dies, and then move its recommendations through Congress on a fast-track basis with limited debate and no amendments.

Three leading proposals have been introduced and are being winnowed into a final version. They would give the White House some--or total--authority to nominate members to the commission. House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has confirmed that his office is coordinating development of a final version for prompt floor action.

Sunset commissions have been proposed, and defeated, before. But public interest veterans say the current situation is unlike any in the past, because the House Republican Study Committee, which includes some of the most anti-regulatory members of Congress, has secured guaranteed floor consideration of a sunset bill.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

The Republican Cut and Run Begins

In a previous post I out lined how Republicans are truly the cut and run party.

Well, after weeks of listening to Republicans call Democrats cowards and cut 'n' runners, we finally see what the Republican plan is...it's cut and run.

The fallacy that exists is that the Democrat Plan is a cut and run plan. This is simply not true. One of the three Democrat Plans is a strategic redeployment. The only plan Republicans have is "stay the course" which frankly, isn't a strategy at all.

But what Republicans are now offering up is pure cut and run policy.

Only, it's being called an Adjustable Troop Withdrawal Schedule...That just sounds more sexy than "cut and run". After all, Republicans are all about words and perception rather than reality.
U.S. General in Iraq Outlines Troop Cuts

The New York Times
By MICHAEL R. GORDON
Published: June 25, 2006

WASHINGTON, June 24 — The top American commander in Iraq has drafted a plan that projects sharp reductions in the United States military presence there by the end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September, American officials say.

#
Now, after criticizing Democratic lawmakers for trying to legislate a timeline for withdrawing troops, skeptics say, the Bush administration seems to have its own private schedule, albeit one that can be adjusted as events unfold.

If executed, the plan could have considerable political significance. The first reductions would take place before this falls Congressional elections, while even bigger cuts might come before the 2008 presidential election.
#

Read the full article

Posted by PoliShifter at 05:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Team Swagger World Police

World Police

"Follow the oil slick road...follow the oil slick road...follow, follow, follow, follow, follow the oil slick road..."

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

I hate George Bush

By Vietnam Vet Who Knows Better

Why?

Funeral services have been set for Marine Cpl. Michael Estrella, a Hemet High School graduate who was killed June 14 in combat in Iraq.
Estrella, 20, was participating in a foot patrol in Al Anbar province when he was attacked by small-arms fire, reported the Marine Corps Base Hawaii in a statement. Estrella was stationed in Hawaii.

Marine officials said Estrella was the 2,500th member of the U.S. military to die in Iraq.

George Bush’s war hit home today. There is no other way to express it. I hate George Bush. It is not because he is a Republican but because he is a corporatist and is killing our soldiers for profit.

Have you taken the time to ponder the number 2,500? It is not just another number as purported by George Bush and Tony Snow. It is more than the population of small town America. It is a large town High School student body. It is 12 Companies of American soldiers or a re-enforced battalion.

During a two week period in Viet Nam our unit experienced combined deaths of more than 4,000 men. There are times that I have walked through crowds and small towns and tried to imagine the carnage that we as humans bring upon ourselves. There really was no justification for all of the killing in Viet Nam but there is absolutely no justification for the killing in Iraq.

The question was asked yesterday, “If you are a Republican what are you getting out of this war?” What are you personally gaining from the deaths of innocent civilians, our soldiers and the death of American Freedom? What is in it for you?

Please tell me because I want to understand why it is okay to kill, kill and kill some more. Explain it to me. Make me understand. I am a big boy. I can handle the truth. Tell me what it was that I missed in Viet Nam. What valuable lesson did I not learn about killing. Brave up Republican. It is a simple question. Tell me why I should endure one more day of your stupid war.

George Bush is simply a stupid, selfish and moronic man. What is your excuse Republican?

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Bush Administration Perusing Your Banking Records

I guess tapping your phones, reading your emails, and monitoring your internet searches just wasn't enough for the Bush Administration. Now's they're reviewing your banking records.

This shit won't stop until Bush is removed from office. And it will continue to get worse until he is removed from office.

From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON, June 22 - Under a secret Bush administration program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, counterterrorism officials have gained access to financial records from a vast international database and examined banking transactions involving thousands of Americans and others in the United States, according to government and industry officials.

The program is limited, government officials say, to tracing transactions of people suspected of ties to Al Qaeda by reviewing records from the nerve center of the global banking industry, a Belgian cooperative that routes about $6 trillion daily between banks, brokerages, stock exchanges and other institutions. The records mostly involve wire transfers and other methods of moving money overseas or into and out of the United States. Most routine financial transactions confined to this country are not in the database.

#

Operative words here: Most routine financial transactions confined to this country are not in the database.

Does anyone still believe or trust the Bush Administration? I sure as hell don't. If they say they are doing something just a little bit, odds are they are doing it to everyone. Remember how the so-called warrantless wire tap program was supposedly narrow in scope?

Remember Saddam's reconstituted nuclear program? Remember Yellow Cake uranium? Insurgency in its last throes? The war last 6 days, 6 weeks, Rumsfeld doubting 6 months? Remember how Iraqi Oil was going to pay for the war and the reconstruction of Iraq?

Lies. Lies. Lies.

Bush is watching you.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Ann Coulter on Murtha: ""The reason soldiers invented ‘fragging.’”

From Media Matters:

Coulter: If Murtha "did get fragged, he'd finally deserve one of those Purple Hearts"

Summary: Ann Coulter refused to explain -- and even expanded upon -- her recent claim that Rep. John P. Murtha is "the reason soldiers invented fragging," military slang meaning the intentional killing of a member of one's own unit. On a Denver radio show, Coulter referred to her fragging comment as one of her "best lines" and refused to confirm that she was not "suggesting that anybody should off John Murtha," stating only: "It is what it is." On Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Coulter further expanded upon her statement, asserting that if Murtha "did get fragged, he'd finally deserve one of those Purple Hearts."

Continue Reading at Media Matters

Vietnam Vet Who Knows Better weighs in:

"Anne Coulter recently charged that Congressman John Murtha is the reason soldiers invented fragging.

Unfortunately she may be right. It is leaders like John Murtha that set high standards of leadership and win the respect and admiration of their troops. It is these standards that soldiers use to judge failed leaders like George Bush and cause incidents of fragging."

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Where's Laura Bush?

What happened to Pickles? I haven't seen nor heard from Laura Bush in quite a while. Why didn't she go wih her husband on this last trip?

It's been weeks since Wayne Madsen reported:

Mayflower Hotel sources in Washington, DC have gone from "neither confirm nor deny" the presence of Laura Bush there last week to conceding that if she stayed there "she would have been registered under a different name." This is standard procedure when the Secret Service wants to cover the presence of a VIP, especially the First Lady whose presence at the hotel last week was bound to fuel speculation about her rocky relationship with George W. Bush.

The Mayflower Hotel is owned by Marriott Corporation and insiders report that the corporate headquarters has warned against anyone talking about the presence last week of the First Lady. Longtime employees are definitely "afraid to talk about this Mrs. Bush thing," said one source.

From a State Department source, WMR has learned that there is definitely "something to the Bush-Rice" relationship. "They definitely have something going on between them," said the source speaking on strict anonymity.

Previously Wayne had reported:

Rocky shoals for Bush marriage? Informed sources Inside the Beltway report that First Lady Laura Bush has established temporary residence in the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC as a result of a tiff with President Bush over an extramarital relationship involving her husband. Mr. Bush’s tryst is said to involve Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. It is not known how long Mrs. Bush plans to remain at the

Mayflower, however, her security detail has been present at the hotel during hours when the First Lady would normally be residing in the White House.

While she was National Security Adviser, Rice, who has never been married, referred to George W. Bush as “my husband” before she corrected herself and said, “President. Bush” Rice was speaking at a dinner hosted by New York Times bureau chief Philip Taubman when she made her “husband” remarks.

#

I was sort of hoping the Republicans in Congress would call up Kenneth Starr and have him start another $80 million investigation into a President's sex life. I was looking forward to Linda Tripp perhaps having lunch with Condi Rice in order to tape her most intimate conversations about Sex with George.

Does George like cigars too? Does Condi have any stained skirt suits?

What is George's definition of an affair? I was looking forward to getting to all these National Security issues just as we did when Clinton was President.

But alas, it seems our do-nothing Congress doesn't care if Bush is banging Condi or if Laura Pickles Bush is having a lesbian affair.

No, our Republican dominated Congress is way too focused on making sure the Voting Rights Act is not renewed, NOT increasing minimum wage, keep our troops in Iraq indefinately, and making sure their corporate cronies keep getting billions of tax payer dollars in contracts.

I mean, after all, shouldn't a President's sex life remain a private matter? Does it really affect National Security that much if George bangs Condi once in a while? I'd rather have them banging each other than dropping bombs on Iran. I say we send them some levitra.

Hell, why not go three-way and have Laura join in? If we can keep them occupied then maybe we won't invade and occupy any other sovereign nations based on faulty intelligence.

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Renewal of Voting Rights Act postponed

By Laurie Kellman, Associated Press June 22, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Renewal of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which eliminated many anti black voting practices, suffered a setback yesterday when House Republicans disagreed on whether to require bilingual ballots and federal oversight of Southern states.

The dissension in a closed caucus meeting grew so intense it forced Republican leaders to postpone indefinitely a scheduled vote on renewing the act.

On the voting rights bill, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert and three other leaders only promised a vote on the renewal ``as soon as possible." The uncertainty in the House led Senate schedulers to hold off on a plan to advance an identical bill next week.

``Apparently, the leadership of the Republican Party cannot bring its own rank-and-file members into line to support the Voting Rights Act," said Representative Artur Davis, a Democrat from Alabama.

``That ought to be a significant embarrassment as they fan around the country trying to skim off a few black votes in the next four months," Davis said.

Several Republicans, many from Southern states, contended at the meeting that the renewal unfairly singled out nine states for federal oversight, without according them credit for making strides against discriminatory voting practices in their pasts.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Wingnuts Debunked (Again)

Today, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) held a press conference to announce that we found WMD's in Iraq! All the wingnuts went crazy once again high-fiving each other and shaking their milkshakes tyring to get their swagger back.

But there turned out to be a little bit of a problem. The WMD's found were degraded pre-1991 shells. Still that doesn't stop some wingnuts such as Captain's Quarters and other members of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists from trying to make lemonade out of Santorum's lemons.

There's just one problem: It's hard to make lemonade from lemons that pre-date 1991.

From Think Progress: Defense Department Disavows Santorum’s WMD Claims

Today, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) held a press conference and announced “we have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.” Santorum and Hoekstra are hyping a document that describes degraded, pre-1991 munitions that were already acknowledged by the White House’s Iraq Survey Group and dismissed.

Fox News’ Jim Angle contacted the Defense Department who quickly disavowed Santorum and Hoekstra’s claims. A Defense Department official told Angle flatly that the munitions hyped by Santorum and Hoekstra are “not the WMD’s for which this country went to war.”

Fox’s Alan Colmes broke the news to Santorum. Watch the video at Think Progress.

Transcript:

COMBS: Congressman, Senator, it’s Alan Colmes. Senator, the Iraq Survey Group — let me go to the Duelfer Report — says that Iraq did not have the weapons our intelligence believed were there. And Jim Angle reported this for Fox News quotes a defense official who says these were pre-1991 weapons that could not have been fired as designed because they already been degraded. And the official went on to say these are not the WMD’s this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had and not the WMD’s for which this country went to war. So the chest beating at this Republicans are doing tonight thinking this is a justification is not confirmed by the defense department.

SANTORUM: I’d like to know who that is. The fact of the matter is, I’ll wait and see what the actual Defense Department formally says or more important what the administration formally says.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Republicans Reject Minimum Wage Increase

By DAVID ESPO

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Republican-controlled Senate refused Wednesday to raise the minimum wage, rejecting an election-year proposal from Democrats for the first increase in nearly a decade.

The vote was 52-46, eight short of the 60 needed.

``I don't think the Republicans get it,'' said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., who backed a proposal for a three-step increase in the current wage floor to $7.25 an hour. The federal minimum wage has been fixed at $5.15 an hour since 1997.

Continue Reading

I guess poor workers need to understand that if they demand too much then businesses will just pick up their marbles and go play in India or China where they can pay people 100 times less than what they pay American Worers. Also, they don't have to deal with pesky regulations overseas. Child labor, 16 hour work days, no benefits, and no environmental restictions make it a corporatist's wet dream.

I guess we are all just spoiled in the U.S.

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

Some 85 Iraqi workers abducted by gunmen

How is Snow Job going to spin this?

"Uh, 85...it's a number....but there's so much good news coming out of Iraq I wish people wouldn't just focus on this one negative story..."

Some 85 Iraqi workers abducted by gunmen

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Gunmen abducted about 85 workers Wednesday as they left work at an industrial plant north of Baghdad, police and a witness said. The workers were thought to be mostly Shiite and the plant is located in a predominantly Sunni Arab area.

The witness said that about 85 workers were taken near the plant's parking lot, while police Lt. Thaer Mahmoud said they filled up a bus and a minivan. They were taken at the al-Nasr General Complex in Taji, 20 kilometers (12 miles) north of Baghdad. Taji is predominantly Sunni Arab area that has seen much insurgent activity.

Contniue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

U.S. Soldier speaks on Republican Amensty plan for Insurgents

It's been about a week since several Republicans announced their support for giving amnesty to insurgents that kill U.S. troops.

Yesterday, Shakespeare's Sister published an email from one of those soldiers serving in Iraq.

From Shakespeare's Sister:

This morning I received an email from a reader who asked me if I would be willing to pass along a message from her husband, who’s currently serving in Iraq. After reading the statements from Republican Senators in defense of giving amnesty to terrorists in Iraq, compiled by The Huffington Post (via The All Spin Zone), he sent the following home, with the request that his response to those Senators be published. These are his words, and his name has been included at his request.

#
When an insurgent—a terrorist—an enemy combatant—call them what you will—strikes at an American, he attacks Iraq.

When we these "right, honorable" gentlemen realize that we are in a war we should have never entered—one where our very presence provokes and increases the enemy's resolve and recruitment—perhaps then I will consider their words.

But until then, tell these paper warriors to go to Walter Reed, to Landstuhl, to Sam Houston and face the soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen whose lives have been drastically altered or ended.

Tell them to face the families of the fallen and propose their accolades to our foes.

Instead of resolutions that honor those who are trying to kill us, these senators, these congressmen should devote their efforts, their words, their very lives to try and figure out how we can extricate ourselves from this war.

Perhaps then they can look themselves in the eye and admit Iraq was a mistake and commit all our energies to saving American lives, instead of worrying about mollifying our enemies' rage.

Sean Frerking

A soldier serving in Iraq

read the full letter at Shakespeare's Sister

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Troll Patrol - Nightly Roundup

The Wingers are going apeshit again. This time they are seeing their "victory" go POOF! up in smoker literally overnight. If you came across any of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists last week or so you would have seen them all doing a victory dance. While Bush and the White House offered cautious optimism about the killing of Zarqawi, many of the Chicken Hawks literally went ape shit all but declaring another victory in Iraq.

Everything was going their way; coming up Roses; a new dawning. Tony Snow was bobbing and weaving from the podium: On the 2500 dead troops "it's a number". Talking about who were once the two missing U.S. Soldiers, Snow Job referred to them as "kidnapped". He couldn't understand why the press was so focused on that after such a great week with just a plethora of great news coming out of Iraq.

Well, God Rest Their Souls, those "kidnapped" troops were slaughtered.

All the little milkshake dances the wingnuts were doing last week have vanished. Gone are the high fives and celebrations. I guess we didn't turn another corner. So what do the wingnuts do? Appologize? Show sypathy, remorse, and comfort for the families of fallen soldiers? Nope.

Instead they go out and attack the left side of the blogosphere. The trolls are out accosting anyone and everyone who criticizes the Bush Administration and their handling of the occupation of Iraq. And who else to lead the charge but their Grand Chicken Hawk leader, Rush Limbaugh.

From Crooks and Liars:

Rush: "I got an email here. "(Uh) Rush, (uh) now that two of our own have been tortured and murdered by the terrorists in Iraq, will the Left say that they deserved it? I'm so sick of our cut-and-run liberals. Keep up your great work." Bob C. from Roanoke, Virginia. "PS, I love the way you do the program on the Little Kim (?)" (laughs) I read...no I added that! He didn't, he didn't put that in there. (laughs) You know, it-it's-I-uh...I gotta tell ya, I-I-I perused the liberal, kook blogs today, and they are happy that these two soldiers got tortured. They're saying, "Good riddance. Hope Rumsfeld and whoever sleep well tonight."

Limbaugh Lies

#

hmmm...I haven't read one "liberal kook blog" today that was "happy". In fact, it's been quite the opposite.

Next up: Bill Loofa O'Reilly recommends we become more like Saddam:

From Calling All Wingnuts - O’Reilly’s solution: Run the place like Saddam:

O’Reilly: Now to me, they’re not fighting it hard enough. See, if I’m president, I got probably another 50-60 thousand with orders to shoot on sight anybody violating curfews. Shoot them on sight. That’s me… President O’Reilly… Curfew in Ramadi, seven o’clock at night. You’re on the street? You’re dead. I shoot you right between the eyes. Ok? That’s how I run that country. Just like Saddam ran it. Saddam didn’t have explosions - he didn’t have bombers. Did he? because if you got out of line, you’re dead.

Think it can't get worse? Think again. The right wing is already attacking the uncle of one of the fallen soldiers.

The Wacko Left is Happy US Soldiers Were Tortured?

Let me just break it down here for a momment. The left has NEVER been happy about any of the 2500 DEAD U.S. soldiers, the 15,000 seriously wounded, or the 100,000 dead innocent Iraqis.

What happened today is the Right lost the glow they were basking in from Zarqawi's death. Their reaction is one of sheer anger at losing their mommentum. So they decided to go on a slash and burn rampage throughout the media and blogosphere criticizing anything and everything they can. Their hope is that if they throw enough anvils at us that eventually something may stick.

If you want to see trolls in action check out Blondesense. They nabbed one earlier while Dark Wraith nabbed a stealth troll...can you pick him out?

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

US soldiers 'slaughtered'

I'm sure Tony Snow will tell us not to focus on the bad news since there is SOO much great news coming out of Iraq these days. Besides, the Republicans are probably falling overthemselves to offer these insurgents amnesty.

US soldiers 'slaughtered'

Nadia Abou el-Magd

Cairo - The umbrella group for Iraqi insurgents claimed responsibility for killing two US soldiers in an internet posting on Tuesday.

"We give the good news ... to the Islamic nation that we have carried God's verdict by slaughtering the two captured crusaders," said a statement in the name of the Mujahedeen Shura Council, which groups five insurgent organisations including al-Qaeda in Iraq.

The use of the word "slaughtered" suggested the insurgents had beheaded the two US soldiers who were abducted after an attack on their checkpoint south of Baghdad on Friday.

The US military meanwhile has confirmed that the two soldiers are dead.

"The bodies were found last night in the vicinity of Yusufiya.

"Coalition forces have recovered what we believe are the remains of the soldiers," Major-General William Caldwell told a news conference.

Missing US soldiers 'tortured, killed' in Iraq

Bodies of Missing U.S. Soldiers Recovered

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

United Arab Emirates Dubai Ports World STILL owns our ports

From The Huffington Post:

JOE MULDOON, FULLER & COMPANY: Since March 6th, Dubai Ports World has owned and controlled operations in 22 U.S. ports and that Congress now has dropped the provision that would prohibit their approvals....

...TUCKER: The reference to Congress has to do with the House and Senate stripping out language, put in by the House, that specifically forbid DP World from owning or controlling operations in our ports. With the removal of that language, it's not clear if DPW even legally is bound to sell the properties. The announced agreement by Dubai Ports World to sell was voluntary...

...DOBBS: So at this point, now it's just about four months since this agreement was reached, Congress has backed away from its language. Dubai Ports World has not acted. CFIUS, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, has said that it reserves the right to make Dubai Ports World do what it said it would do publicly. So you're not suggesting, are you, Mr. Tucker, in your reporting here, well, let me rephrase that. Is it a reasonable inference that the American public, the American citizens are being gamed again by this administration and this Congress?...

Read entire transcript here.

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Republicans are the Cut and Run Party

I am still mystified that Rove would suggest that Democrats have an "old pattern" of cutting and running from War. This must be projection since after all, if any Political Party has a cut'n'run policy, it's Republicans.

Let's review, shall we?

Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat and he stayed the course during World War I and led us to Victory by listening to his military commanders.

FDR and Truman stayed the course during World War II and led us to Victory by listening to their military commanders.

Eisenhower cut and run from Korea.

Nixon cut and run from Vietnam.

Daddy Bush cut and run from Iraq the first time.

The real cut'n'runners are Republicans. Democrats get the job done. Republicans give people bumber sticker slogans and when the going gets tough they cut'n'run leaving Democrats to clean up the mess they made.

Democrats have also historically been able to form very effective coalitions with allies from World War I, World War 2, to The Balkins.

All Republicans know how to do is offend people.

Posted by PoliShifter at 03:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Why did the Republican cross the road?

To catch up with the rest of the chickens...

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Happy Father's Day

Please say a prayer for the Sons who have lost Fathers and the Fathers who have lost Sons. Thanks to A Little Reality

Posted by PoliShifter at 12:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Triangle of Death Nabs Two U.S. Soldiers

2 U.S. troops sought amid abduction report

#
The New York Times reported that Iraqi residents in the area said they saw two soldiers taken prisoner by a group of masked guerrillas. It said the two surviving soldiers were led to two cars and driven away.
#

This shouldn't concern anybody, I mean, Republicans are poised to support amnesty for insurgents who attack U.S. troops.

This means the insurgents can kill and torture these troops without fear of punishment! Think of all the revenge for Gitmo and Abu Ghraib these insurgents can take out on our troops! And think about how Republicans support not holding such insurgents accountable for their actions!

Just stay the fucking course. Don't ask questions, don't demand policy change, and for God's Sake don't question The President for he is all wise. There's a saying out here in California, probably got it in Texas too...Fool me once...

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Stephen Colbert Gitmo Formidable Opponent

On Thursday's episode of the Colbert Report with Stephen Colbert, Stephen did another installment of formidable opponent where he debates himself. The topic: Gitmo.

It's a must see! Here is a link to the video at Comedy Central...click on the "enter now" at the middle of the page after the link opens. You have to watch a 30 second commercial but it's worth it.

Here is a transcript prepared by me, PoliShifter. Enjoy!

For those of you who don't know, Formidable Opponent is a regular installment on the Colbert Report where Stephen debates a controvertial topic with himself.

In this episode, Stephen is wearing a Blue Tie (BT) while the other Stephen is wearing a Red Tie (RT).

Colbert (RT): Now, I understand how important it is to keep our country safe from terrorists Stephen and no one believes in locking up the bad guys more than I do. But holding men without trial, isn't that un-American?

Colbert (BT): Evidently not...

Colbert (RT): Well, isn't America supposed to be the number one defender of human rights? These men are being kept under terrible conditions...

Colbert (BT): Terrible conditions? Gitmo's in the Carribean! It's like Club Med!

Colbert (RT): Where you're kept in a tiny cell, you're told what to do all day, and if you don't eat your're force fed!

Colbert (BT): Ok, it's more like a cruise ship...

Colbert (RT): Well, isn't this prison losing us the hearts and minds of the Arab street?

Colbert (BT): You're right! We'll close it...

Colbert (RT): Really?

Colbert (BT): Sure! We'll just ship them off to our secret prisons in Eastern Europe...

Colbert (RT): No, you're missing the point! America is supposed to be a beacon of freedom in the world! We need to either charge these guys and give them their fair trials and let them go...

Colbert (BT): We can't give these terrorists trials, we don't have any evidence...

Colbert (RT): Then how do you know their terrorists?

Colbert (BT): How do you know they're not? I mean 460 arabs arrested in Afghanistan and Iraq, some of them gotta be terrorists...

Colbert (RT): Well that's blatant racial profiling!

Colbert (BT): You're just talking like a whitey...

Colbert (RT): Now but, what about the guys who are innocent?

Colbert (BT): What about'em?

Colbert (RT): We can't keep innocent people there forever!

Colbert (BT): Well if they're really innocent, they won't mind being locked up

Colbert (RT): Na, I don't...how so?

Colbert (BT): Ok, let's say you're an inmate at Gitmo...

Colbert (RT): Oh No! No! Wha, what have I done? Am I a terrorist?

Colbert (BT): No, you're perfectly innocent...

Colbert (RT): Whoo! I was pretty sure I wasn't a terrorist... Wait a minute! I'm an innocent man at Gitmo! I demand to see my lawyer! Clangity Clankity Clang!

Colbert (BT): Ooooh can't do that! We've kept you here for four years, you drink yellow water, it's possible the guards humiliate you and your religion, and maybe(keep it on the QT), you've been tortured. If you're found innocent, how will we look then?

Colbert (RT): But I have the right to an attorney, it's one of the fundamental rights of this country!

Colbert (BT): Uh, by "this country" do you mean Cuba? Because uh, that's where you are...

Colbert (RT): Ok then under the Geneva Convention...

Colbert (BT): Ba Ah Ah Ah! You're not really a prisoner of war...

Colbert (RT): Well, what am I?

Colbert (BT): Well, I think you're a terrorist

Colbert (RT): You do?

Colbert (BT): Well you are in Gitmo

Colbert (RT): But you just said I was innocent!

Colbert (BT): You were innocent...four years ago. This place has changed you. I mean, all that time you've been kept in a cage without trial, aren't you a little angry?

Colbert (RT): Damn right! I am furious!

Colbert (BT): What would you do if you could get a hold of me?

Colbert (RT): I'd fucking kill you! Oh no!

Colbert (BT): see?

Colbert (RT): Oh my God! You can't let me go! You have to keep me in here to prevent me from hurting innocent people like me!

Colbert (BT): Yep, you're a good man!

Posted by PoliShifter at 01:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

I am a Proud American

Sorry Republicans, I Love America too.

But I love America in a 1776 way as opposed to a 2006 Bush way.

When I was in school they taught us about George Washington, Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, Sam Adams, and the Sons of Liberty. These were men that valued freedom above all else: Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, seperation of church and state, freedom of the press, and the right to due process.

I believe in Amendment I:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I believe in Amendment IV:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

We were taught about FDR, DDE, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferoson. America was a country that defended truth, freedom and democracy. We fought against fascism during WW2 and won. The wrongs America had committed in the past (slavery, genocide against the native americans, internment of the Japanese, etc) we have tried to right.

Yes I love America but not Bush's America. I do not agree with torturing, invading countries based on falsified intelligence, spying on Americans, warrantless wiretaps, and holding people against their will without due process.

I believe in Franklin's America and DDE's America:

"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither" ... Benjamin Franklin

"All of us have heard this term 'preventative war' since the earliest days of Hitler. I recall that is about the first time I heard it. In this day and time... I don't believe there is such a thing; and, frankly, I wouldn't even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing. " Dwight D Eisenhower

"If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on." Dwight D Eisenhower

"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience…we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. " Dwight D Eisenhower

What Bush has done to America is a perversion and I think it is the duty of all Americans to resist such tyranny. Live Free or Die.

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Republicans support Amnesty for Insurgents that kill U.S. Troops

This has been reported widely around the blogosphere already but I think it is worth posting again.

Earlier this week the Prime Minister of Iraq Nouri al-Maliki proposed amnesty for sunni insurgents who kill U.S. Soldiers.

At the same time Republicans have been going on and on about how we need to stay the course in Iraq. Republicans say setting a time table to withdraw from Iraq would only endanger our troops. Hastert said we need to maintain the same steely resolve those on Flight 93 had. All the while Republicans kept equating Iraq with 9/11 for good measure.

All this is normal talking points for Republicans. So imagine my surprise when I heard Republican Ted Stevens (of the "bridge to nowhere" cry baby fame) say he actually supports amnesty for insurgents!!

That's right folks! Republicans want to keep our troops in Iraq indeffinately AND give amnesty to insurgents that kill our troops. What are our soldiers to think?

Atrios:

You know, it's actually the case that the way to deal with an insurgency is with a political, not a military, process, but I really don't know how Republicans seamlessly slip from kill'em all to hug'em all.

From the DSCC:

This afternoon on the Senate floor, several Senate Republicans are DEFENDING the proposal to give amnesty to terrorists who have killed or wounded American troops. Here is a quick compilation:

TED STEVENS - “IF THAT’S AMNESTY, I’M FOR IT:” “I really believe we ought to try to find some way to encourage that country to demonstrate to those people who have been opposed to what we're trying to do, that it's worthwhile for them and their children to come forward and support this democracy. And if that's amnesty, I'm for it. I'd be for it. And if those people who are, come forward… if they bore arms against our people, what's the difference between those people that bore arms against the Union in the War between the States? What’s the difference between the Germans and Japanese and all the people we’ve forgiven?” – Sen. Ted Stevens

MCCONNELL SUGGESTED A RESOLUTION COMMENDING IRAQIS FOR GIVING TERRORISTS AMNESTY. “…might it not just be as useful an exercise to be trying to pass a resolution commending the Iraqi government for the position that they’ve taken today with regard to this discussion of Amnesty?” – Sen. Mitch McConnell

ALEXANDER COMPARED IRAQI AMNESTY FOR TERRORISTS TO NELSON MANDELA’S PEACE EFFORTS. “Is it not true that Nelson Mandela's courage and his ability to create a process of reconciliation and forgiveness was a major factor in what has been a political miracle in Africa…Did not Nelson Mandela, win a - the co-winner of - a noble Nobel Peace Prize just for this sort of gesture?” – Sen. Lamar Alexander

CORNYN: IRAQI AMNESTY DEBATE IS “A DISTRACTION.” “It makes no sense for the United States Senate to shake its finger at the new government of Iraq and to criticize them… it really is a distraction from the debate that I think the American people would want us to have.” - Sen. John Cornyn

CHAMBLISS: AMNESTY IS OK FOR EX-INSURGENTS AS LONG AS THEY ARE ON OUR SIDE NOW. “Is it not true today that we have Iraqis who are fighting the war against the insurgents, who at one time fought against American troops and other coalition troops as they were marching to Baghdad, who have now come over to our side and are doing one heck of a job of fighting along, side by side, with Americans and coalition forces, attacking and killing insurgents on a daily basis?” - Sen. Saxby Chambliss

Other who have blogged about this:

Stubborn Liberal - After losing 2,500 of our men and women in Iraq and having over 18,000 wounded, Sen. Ted Stevens (AK-R) suggested that we grant amnesty to those in Iraq who have killed Americans.

Blondesense - GOP Senators Defend Proposal That Gives Amnesty To Terrorists Who Kill US Troops

Thosethingswesay - Amnesty for the Insurgency?

The Daily Sandwich - GOP decides to offer amnesty

Media Needle - Amnesty

Brilliant At Breakfast - Senate Republicans: Amnesty for insurgents who kill American soldiers is A-OK with us

PhillyBits - Amnesty For Terrorists. But Not Geneva Conventions.

The Nattering Nabob - Amnesty for terrorists - IMAGINE if a Democrat pulled this horseshit?

Objective Justice - Dipshit Republicans

Notes from the Charcoal Moon - Republicans = The Amnesty Party

Crooks and Liars - Ted Stevens: "IF THAT'S AMNESTY, I'M FOR IT"...

Jesus' General - Dear Sen. Cornyn, - As a Republican,

"I don't think I've ever been prouder of one of our senators than I was today when you rose to address the terrorist amnesty issue. Like you, I don't think the US Senate should condemn the Iraqi Prime Minister for offering amnesty to terrorists who kill our soldiers. Why waste time on it? It's not like our military is staffed with College Republicans; most of our soldiers are brown or poor. If pardoning their killers allows Prime Minister Maliki to pump more oil, more power to him."

(h/t Crooks and Liars )

Washington Post - Iraq Amnesty Plan May Cover Attacks On U.S. Military, Iraq Leader Also Backs Talks With Resistance

Posted by PoliShifter at 06:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)

Bush still not allowing Iraqis to Govern themselves

From Think Progress

The AP reports that Iraq’s Vice President, Tariq al-Hashimi, personally asked President Bush to set a timeline for withdrawal of U.S. forces the day before. Iraq’s President, Jalal Talabani, said he supported the request:

Iraq’s vice president has asked President Bush for a timeline for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Iraq, the Iraqi president’s office said. Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni, made the request during his meeting with Bush on Tuesday, when the U.S. president made a surprise visit to Iraq.

“I supported him in this,” President Jalal Talabani said in a statement released Wednesday. Al-Hashimi’s representatives could not immediately be reached for comment Thursday.

But Bush said: Iraqis had “concerns” that a timetable would disrupt their strategy to create a secure and democratic Iraq:

And the willingness of some to say that if we’re in power we’ll withdraw on a set timetable concerns people in Iraq, because they understand our coalition forces provide a sense of stability, so they can address old wrongs and develop their strategy and plan to move forward. They need our help and they recognize that. And so they are concerned about that.

#

Iraq's just got to understand that they are our colony, not a sovereign nation. That's why we are building permanent bases and planning a minimum of a fifty year occupation. The nerve of Iraqis to think they can tell Bush what they want to do and govern themselves....

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

America - A quaint idea to be replaced by The North American Union via the Bush Administration

While liberals and conservatives disagree on many issues, both groups are proud Americans. Perhaps now there are some issues that both liberals and conservatives can finally agree upon.

For example, while the United States is distracted by the occupation of Iraq and high gas prices, the Bush Administration has been quietly putting in to place the legislation to create a North American Union modeling itself after the European Union.

Part of this plan involves building the NAFTA super highway from southern Mexico, through the midwestern United States, all the way up to Canada. The other part of the plan is to create the Amero as the continental currency. Another part of the plan calls for creating a North American Union parliment complete with a Prime Minister which will have total control of what will soon be open borders. My guess is Bush will set himself up to be the first Prime Minister of the North American Union.

American Sovereignty will soon become a thing of the past and Congress made obsolete.

While Republicans debate immigration, few realize they are working against their own best interest. They turn a blind eye to Bush's North American Union plan which calls for open borders while they fight to clamp down on the borders of the United States.

The Bush Administration has no loyalty to the United States. Their loyalties lie with the corporations and that is precisely why the Bush Administration wants to create the North American Union.

Mexico can no longer compete with China in the production of cheap goods. It is thought that if Mexico could decrease its shipping costs then cheap goods will once again be able to flow from Mexico to the U.S. and Canada.

How can this happen? One way is to lower wages, environmental restrictions, and government regulation. This will be accomplished by shipping goods in containers to Lazaro Cardenas, Mexico and then shipping them by rail to Monterey, Mexico. From there they will be loaded on to Mexican trucks with Mexican truck drivers and make their way up the NAFTA superhighway. No more teamsters, no more long shoremen, and millions of American jobs lost all in the name of the North American Union.

A "speed pass" will allow them to cross the border within minutes. Their destination will be a customs hub in Kansas City operated by the Mexican Government! The NAFTA super highway itself will be a toll road contructed, owned and operated by a corporation out of Spain called Cintra.

So while Republicans wrap themselves in the flag and claim to be protecting America, Bush is quietly working to destroy it. While Republicans seek to crack down on our porus broders, Bush quietly seeks to eliminate the borders.

Resources:

Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway

North American Union Already Starting to Replace USA

The Plan to Replace the Dollar With the 'Amero'

Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America - spp.gov

North American SuperCorridor Coalition

KC SmartPort

Trans Texas Corridor

Posted by PoliShifter at 01:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

Amnesty for insurgents that attack U.S. Troops

Iraq Amnesty Plan May Cover Attacks On U.S. Military

Leader Also Backs Talks With Resistance

By Ellen Knickmeyer and Jonathan Finer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, June 15, 2006; A01

BAGHDAD, June 14 -- Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Wednesday proposed a limited amnesty to help end the Sunni Arab insurgency as part of a national reconciliation plan that Maliki said would be released within days. The plan is likely to include pardons for those who had attacked only U.S. troops, a top adviser said.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

Eugene Police arrest Soldier Suzanne Swift

So it seems the Police are now involving themselves in military matters. How much longer before the Police are the military and vice-versa?

Eugene solider arrested

A Eugene woman has been arrested for refusing to deploy for a second tour of duty in Iraq.EUGENE (AP) - Eugene police say a 21-year-old Eugene woman who refused to deploy with her Army unit to Iraq for a second tour has been arrested and will be returned to Fort Lewis, Washington.

Eugene Police spokesman Sergeant Rich Stronach said Specialist Suzanne Swift, who is 21, was detained at the home of her family Sunday night.

She was listed as AWOL late last year.

Her mother, Sara Rich, told Oregon Public Broadcasting that her daughter served in Iraq with a military police unit in 2004 and endured name-calling and constant sexual harassment.

Continue Reading

AWOL Soldier Returns To Fort Lewis

By Tracy Vedder

EUGENE, ORE. - Another Fort Lewis soldier is refusing to go to Iraq, but this time, it's a woman.

And she claims she was the victim of ongoing sexual assault and harassment during her first tour in the country.

Military police brought Suzanne Swift back to Fort Lewis in handcuffs Tuesday. She's accused of deserting her military police unit just before they were supposed to go back to Iraq.

But her attorney says she was afraid -- not of the danger in Iraq, but of her fellow soldiers.

Swift joined the Army in 2002, signing up for a 5-year stint with the military police. In February of 2004, Swift and her MP brigade deployed to Karbala, Iraq.

There, her attorney and her mother both say she was repeatedly sexually harassed by five sergeants.

"Sergeants will make bets on who can make which private, female private, their private," Swift's mother Sara Rich says that her daughter told her.

Another sergeant allegedly forced the 21-year-old specialist into a sexual relationship.

"She was afraid for her life if she didn't do this," explains Swift's attorney Larry Hildes, "because of the power that he had over her."

Hildes says Swift didn't believe she could say no.

"He could send her into combat," he said. "He could not provide support for her, he could demote her, he could demand that she be discharged."

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

The Media's Crawling All Over this Story

FEMA was defrauded for more than $1 Billion dollars and the media can't get enough of it.

Defrauding the government is a serious issue. Especially when things happen like $13 Billion going missing in Iraq or the $2.3 Trillion that cannot be accounted for by the Pentagon.

The thing that bothers me about this FEMA story is that all the so-called Conservatives are going to scream "see see!! Government Programs encourage fraud and waste!! We must cut social asistance programs!!" while they continue to turn a blind eye to contract fraud being committed by Halliburton or the contract fraud committed in the aftermath of Katrina.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Democrats need to fight back.

So Rover got his swagger back and he is out swinging hard. He' saying that if we listened to Democrats we would have cut and run from Iraq and therefore would not have killed Zarqawi. This is total bullshit. President Bush could have killed Zarqawi on three seperate occassions prior to the invasion of Iraq! Democrats need to be repeating this message over and over that the occupation of Iraq is an occupation of choice. Bush could solve the crisis at any time he sees fit.

Like now for example, Bush is sending in 70,000 troops to secure Baghdad. Why now? Why not six months ago? Why not a year ago? BushCo has decided they have milked the Iraq cash cow long enough and that they better clean it up or else they could lose their strangle hold on power come November.

They know what they need is a stable Iraq giving the impression that we have won. Then Rove et al will ride this to re-election victory in November.

Democrats need to act fast or else they will once again lose in November. It needs to be pointed out over and over that Bush could have killed Zarqawi years ago. It needs to be pointed out that we could have stabilized Iraq years ago if it were in Bush's best interest. Now, stabilizing Iraq is in Bush's best interest because he is scared shitless that Democrats will take back Congress and impeach him.

Halliburton and Bush's war profiteering cronies will have to wait until after November to continue their raiding of the U.S. treasury.

Democrats, this is not the time to play fair or nice. The battle is now; at stake is our country and our way of life as Americans. If you do not push back the Rove propaganda immediately, you will lose in November.

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Rove Will Not Be Charged

Turd Blossom Karl Rove won't be charged in the CIA Plame leak case. Who got to Fitz and how? Rove's back and bigger than ever with his new message that if we cut and run like Democrats want us to, then we wouldn't have got Zarqawi.

MSNBC is gleefully broadcasting Rove's new propaganda point. But they won't tell you that Bush could have killed Zarqawi on three different occasions even BEFORE we invaded Iraq.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

What's BushCo talking about at Camp David?

It's beeing billed as a strategery session to discuss the occupation of Iraq and how to solve the growing crisis. Bush's "war cabinet" (which is a laugh since Bush declared "mission accomplished" long ago) says they're reassessing their failed occupation strategy. But I doubt they will change or do anything. After all, Bush is not about strategery, he's about propaganda.

The real crisis facing the Bush Administration, and probably the motivation for this special meeting, is the loss of of an important BushCo boogey man: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Yes, the untimely death of al-Zarqawi has left the Bush Administration in a lurch. God forbid this thing snow ball and Al Qaeda in Iraq actually disbands or worse, Iraq becomes peaceful. This would be a travesty for Bush. Gone would be his glorious war. Gone would be the excuses and reasons to keep troops in Iraq. Gone would be the need for permanent fortresses in Iraq.

No, Bush can't have that. After all, BushCo had groomed al-Zarqawi for a prominent role as boogey man for a year prior to the invasion of Iraq. On three occasions BEFORE the war, Bush could have killed al-Zarqawi. Bush turned down the opportunities fearing that killing al-Zarqawi would weaken his case for invading Iraq.

With al-Zarqawi dead, the Bushstappo have lost a powerful piece of propaganda and Bush without propaganda is like a TV without power.

Thus the discussions at Camp David are probably revolving around ideas on how to drag out the occupation of Iraq longer, naming a new boogey man, and how they will keep funding the insurgency. They are also probably talking about how to crack down on the military so that they don't go and kill more boogey men. Some how someone slipped in letting al-Zarqawi get dead. God forbid they kill Bin Laden because then Bush's "war on terror" would be all but over.

Without war there would be no need for warrantless wiretaps, internet data minining, sneaking and peaking into people's bank accounts, databasing phone calls, checking library records, and compiling people's My Space profiles.

Without War, without Fear, without Terror, Bush is screwed. Thus, I am fairly certain that Bush's focus at Camp David will be on how to increase fear and terror, not prevent it.

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

PNAC closing its doors

Project for the New American Century aka PNAC is shutting down citing "mission accomplished".

PNAC is a NeoConservative thintank founded by notorious members such as Bill Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Bill Bennett, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, among others.

PNAC has been directing Bush's foreign policy ever since The Decider took office. What I find hilarious is that just a few months ago, many NeoCons were admiting that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake and a botched job. Now they are claiming victory and closing their doors. My guess is that they will just reincarnate with a new name somewhere.

I also think they are closing down not because PNAC was a success but because it was a miserable failure that has garnered too much negative attention. The term NeoCon has become associated with fear mongering, war mongering, fascism, and Bush. It's lost its mystique and prestige and has become something to be hated, not adored.

My guess is they will change their name from NeoCon to something else. Be watching for these same crop of NeoCons to sprout up somewhere else very soon.

From the Washington Post:

The doors may be closing shortly on the nine-year-old Project for a New American Century, the neoconservative think tank headed by William Kristol , former chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle and now editor of the Weekly Standard, which is must reading for neocon cogitators and agitators.

The PNAC was short on staff -- having perhaps a half-dozen employees -- but very long on heavy hitters. The founders included Richard B. Cheney , Donald H. Rumsfeld , Paul D. Wolfowitz , Jeb Bush , I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby , William J. Bennett, Zalmay Khalilzad and Quayle.

The goal was to continue the Reaganite, muscular approach to projecting American power and "moral clarity" in a post-Cold War world, the group's manifesto said. The targets were liberal drift and conservative isolationism.

PNAC and its supporters dominated the Bush administration's foreign policy apparatus and championed a policy to get rid of Saddam Hussein long before Sept. 11, 2001.

In its famous 1998 letter to President Bill Clinton , PNAC said "removing Saddam Hussein and his regime . . . now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy." Clinton was urged to use all diplomatic, political and military means to topple him.

Despite the happy chatter before the Iraq invasion about cheering crowds and bouquets and cakewalks and how the war was going to pay for itself, the signatories wrote that "we are fully aware of the dangers of implementing this policy."

There had been debate about PNAC's future, but the feeling, a source said, was of "goal accomplished" and it looks to be heading toward closing. Former executive director Gary J. Schmitt , who had been executive director of President Ronald Reagan 's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, left recently for a post at the American Enterprise Institute. (Not a big move. Actually, only five floors up from PNAC.) Still, seems like a short century.

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Bush plans to keep troops in Iraq for Decades

From Think Progress, as reported in the New York Times:

Mr. Bush on Friday made clear that the American commitment to the country will be long-term. Officials say the administration has begun to look at the costs of maintaining a force of roughly 50,000 troops there for years to come, roughly the size of the American presence maintained in the Philippines and Korea for decades after those conflicts.

General McCAFFREY says we'll keep troops in Iraq for at least another ten years:

GEN. McCAFFREY: Well, if it’s a government that works, we can probably sustain the U.S. troops, 50,000, 60,000, 70,000 troops there for 10 years and hope that Iraq turns into a responsible governmental entity that doesn’t attack its neighbors, doesn’t build WMD. I still think that’s a likely outcome if the political system can come together on the ground.

This has been reported before but worth reading again:

Congressional Conservatives Quietly Strip Provision That Prohibited Permanent Bases In Iraq

We're never leaving Iraq, understand? Not in your lifetime.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Republicans At Work

Many of you have heard that the Republican Congress and The Decider have made banning Gay Marriage their top priority. It is my opinon that when our leaders engage in this type of frivilous and meanlingless debate that they are only encouraging this type of behavior:

NEW YORK (AP) - A singer suffered a broken jaw and other injuries in an attack by a group yelling anti-gay slurs, yet he hopes to perform again by the end of the month, police and his publicist said.

Kevin Aviance, 38, whose songs have topped the Billboard dance chart, is expected to be released Monday from the hospital where he underwent surgery, publicist Len Evans said.

Four people were arrested on hate-crime charges, police said.

Continue Reading this article

Posted by PoliShifter at 03:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Children with Terminal Cancer Using Their Disease to Get Sympathy

By Steve Young

Another Crown Forum Sellout

Chapter 12 - Like We're Supposed To Care?

I have never seen children enjoying their incurable diseases so much.

It seems to be all the rage for witches of want with a so-called "terrible illness" to try and turn their maladies into some sort of whining, cause-celeb begathon for medicines and research to cure their condition or relieve their pain.

Okay, you have an irreversible disease. So did Al Capone. It doesn't make you some martyr.

First of all, we call these conditions terminal for a reason and spending time and good money on a cure for something terminal seems be a rather wasteful use of good research that might be better used for curing something curable.

Prior to getting leukemia or malignant tumors -- or whatever it is they say they have -- these children didn't seem to have a single problem with disease, much less expecting the rest of America to take time away from creating a strong economic base for healthy kids to take advantage of. An economy that these taking-up-needed-space-in-hospices cry-babies could also have access to if they wouldn't be so selfish and lived healthfully.

Now, it seems that the world is supposed to drop everything because these weakened weebles weren't careful enough to properly count the number of red or white blood cells that could cohabit peacefully without killing each other off.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 03:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Sergeant says rules of engagement at Haditha

Sergeant Describes Hunt for Insurgents in Haditha, Denies Coverup

By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 11, 2006; A01

A sergeant who led a squad of Marines during the incident in Haditha, Iraq, that left as many as 24 civilians dead said his unit did not intentionally target any civilians, followed military rules of engagement and never tried to cover up the shootings, his attorney said.

Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, 26, told his attorney that several civilians were killed Nov. 19 when his squad went after insurgents who were firing at them from inside a house. The Marine said there was no vengeful massacre, but he described a house-to-house hunt that went tragically awry in the middle of a chaotic battlefield.

"It will forever be his position that everything they did that day was following their rules of engagement and to protect the lives of Marines," said Neal A. Puckett, who represents Wuterich in the ongoing investigations into the incident. "He's really upset that people believe that he and his Marines are even capable of intentionally killing innocent civilians."

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 03:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Your President

Email to Brown claims Bush was happy former FEMA head was taking heat for Katrina response

From an email sent to Brownie:

I did hear of one reference to you, at the Cabinet meeting yesterday. I wasn't there but I heard someone commented that the press was sure beating up on Mike Brown, to which the President replied, "I'd rather they beat up on him than me or Chertoff." Congratulations on doing a great job of diverting hostile fire away from the leader.

Read more here

Posted by PoliShifter at 02:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A protest by 30 people makes the news

But when hundreds of thousands protest the Iraq War and King Bush, nothing happens...interesting.

Ken Krauss of the National Socialist Movement, at podium, salutes with members of the Ku Klux Klan.

KKK converges on Antietam battlefield Authorities outnumber Klan, demonstrators by more than 3-to-1

SHARPSBURG, Maryland (AP) -- Members of the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups rallied Saturday at the Antietam National Battlefield, believed to be the first time a group was given permission to demonstrate at the site of the bloodiest day of the Civil War.

About 30 people, some in white robes and others in the military-style clothing and swastika armbands of the National Socialist Movement of America, stood next to a farmhouse on the battlefield. Some delivered speeches attacking immigrants, blacks and other minority groups.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 02:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Ann Coulter The Plagiarist

Plagiarism may soon be added to Coulter's lawless behavior to accompany her voter fraud and tax fraud charges.

The Rude Pundit explains and demonstrates Coulter's potential plagiarism...

Posted by PoliShifter at 01:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Please tell me how the left is Godless

First off, let me say that it is my opinion that religion and spirituality are private matters. I believe everyone has the right to worship however they wish without fear of persecution. I do not believe religion should be worn as a badge on one’s sleeve or be used to pedal political influence.

For far too long right wing Republicans have asserted their sole ownership over God. But all one has to is look at the actions of Republicans, the actions of Democrats, and the words of Jesus Christ to see which political party is truly Godless and which political party is not.

When was the last time a Republican advocated for feeding the poor, taking care of the sick, and providing for the elderly? You would have to go all the way back to Theodore Roosevelt to find a progressive Republican. Ever since then, Republicans have been trying to chip away social welfare programs, steal from the poor to give to the rich, and deregulate as much of business as possible

So how are Republican policies like God? The answer is they are not. All one has to do is look at what Jesus said and compare it to Republican Policies to see which party is truly Godless.

Matthew 19:16-24 (New International Version)

The Rich Young Man

16 Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?"

17 "Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."

18 "Which ones?" the man inquired.

Jesus replied, " 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,'[a] and 'love your neighbor as yourself.'[b]"

20 "All these I have kept," the young man said. "What do I still lack?"

21 Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

Mark 12:41-44 (New International Version)

The Widow's Offering

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins,[a]worth only a fraction of a penny.[b]

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on."

Matthew 9:09-12 (New International Version)

The Calling of Matthew

9 As Jesus went on from there, he saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax collector's booth. "Follow me," he told him, and Matthew got up and followed him.

10 While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew's house, many tax collectors and "sinners" came and ate with him and his disciples. 11When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and 'sinners'?"

12 On hearing this, Jesus said, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick.

Luke 10:25-37 (New International Version)

The Parable of the Good Samaritan

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

26 "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"

27 He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'[a]; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[b]"

28 "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

30 In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. 35The next day he took out two silver coins[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'

36 "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

37 The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."
Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

Proverbs 28:27 (New International Version)

27 He who gives to the poor will lack nothing,
but he who closes his eyes to them receives many curses.

Proverbs 22:16 (New International Version)

16 He who oppresses the poor to increase his wealth
and he who gives gifts to the rich—both come to poverty.

I included a couple of proverbs for good measure since proverbs would have been something Jesus studied and taught.

So based on what Christ taught, which political party is Godless? Republicans or Democrats? First off, to be fair, Jesus also taught that we should not judge, but this is not how the political world works. For this exercise we will have to commit the sin of judging.

Republicans are the ones that cut taxes for the wealthy. Republicans want to scrap programs that help the poor such as food stamps and welfare. Republicans want to roll back regulations that protect workers. Republicans want to scrap Social Security. Republicans do not want to raise the minimum wage, provide for preschool, public education, and healthcare. Republicans are the party of the wealthy who practice reverse Robin Hoodism: they steal from the poor and give to the rich.

How is this following the teachings of Christ? How can Republicans claim to be the party of God and Jesus Christ when they do not even follow the teachings of Christ?

What's worse, how could a person call themself a Christian and be Republican? Wealth and Christianity mix like oil and water. Republican policy and the teachings of Christ have NOTHING in common.

If so-called Christians wanted to do the work of Jesus Christ and God the last thing they would do is vote Republican. The first things they would do would be to help the sick, poor, and infirmed. That is what Jesus would want, not tax cuts.

Jesus would want safe working conditions, a living wage, healthcare, social security, and for the wealthy to give to the poor.

What Republicans have done and what they continue to do is anti-Christian.

Tell me again which political party is Godless?

Posted by PoliShifter at 12:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Right Wingers assert their ownership of 9/11

After all the hub-bub over what Ann Coulter said I still could not help but notice that even while SOME conservatives do not condone Coulter's statements, they STILL defend her over all position. I keep seeing wingnut after wingnut say that "it's not right for 9/11 widows to politicize September the 11th..."

I find this laughable and offensive. If the 9/11 widows had all come out in favor of Bush and the Iraq War, right wing talkers and bloggers would be praising them. The only reason they criticize the 9/11 widows is because some of them came out against Bush and the Iraq War.

So the right is now trying to re-assert their ownership over 9/11. After all, it's been their most effective piece of propaganda in history. They are not about to let liberals, democrats, or proressives claim a piece of the 9/11 propaganda machine.

That is what is really at stake here and why so many Republicans and right wingers are tepidly defending Coulter.

Republicans from the President on down the line cannot give a speech these days without referencing 9/11 and the war on terror. They cannot all of a sudden allow the image of 9/11 to be morphed in to grieving widows, incomplete investigations, and the spectre of looming quesitons that still shroud 9/11.

For the right, 9/11 must remain the day we were attacked by terrorists and our justification for invading Iraq. 9/11 must only serve as a political tool used to pry away our freedom, tax dollars, and erode our democracy.

The double threat down being faced by Conservatives, Rublicans, and NeoCons is this:

If they attack Coulter, by proxi they give a little of the 9/11 propaganda pie to the left. They fear that if the left gets a little slice then they will only gain more of the pie with time. If they defend Coulter adamantly then they are bacically carving the pie up and giving a slice to the left.

So their solution is to denounce Coulter for not having tact but support her overall message that it is wrong for the left to politicize 9/11. Only the right is allowed to use September the 11th for propaganda purposes.

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Ann Coulter Attack of the NeoCon FemBot

Mary Matalin, defending Coulter's attacks on 9-11 widows: "I take her larger point"

Defending Coulter, O'Reilly and Limbaugh claimed she "doesn't lie"

On Fox, Coulter further criticized victims -- including Max Cleland and Christopher Reeve -- for using their "personal story": "Just make the argument. Be a man. Step up to the plate."

Coulter suggested 9-11 widows might not give up "celebrity and notoriety" to "have their husbands back"

Dobbs compared Coulter to Michael Moore; she preferred Mencken or Twain

Horowitz: "Ann Coulter is a national treasure"

Posted by PoliShifter at 04:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sean Hannity on Zarqawi

Talking to General Tommy Franks on Fox News Hannity said:

“General, I gotta tell you, when I got up this morning and I turned on the FOX News channel and I got to see that video, with pinpoint accuracy, those 500 pound bombs, one after another being dropped on this man and this location. I gotta tell you. It gives me goosebumps.”
#
“I can’t watch this video enough,” Sean Hannity said as he showed a clip of the bomb blowing up Al-Zarqawi’s house for what must have been the umpteenth time on FOX News. “I get such a good feeling knowing the top level Al Qaeda operative we’ve got here.”

Fox News Hounds asks the question no one's asking:

Query: How could two 500-pound bombs not pulverize Al-Zarqawi’s body beyond recognition? He looked relatively unscathed in the photos repeatedly shown all day today. (H/T to Marie Therese for raising this question in a behind-the-scenes email.)

Source: Fox News Hounds - Bloodthirsty Sean Hannity On Al-Zarqawi Killing: “Those 500 pound bombs… It gives me Goosebumps.”

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Rush On al-Zarqawi

"It's a Glorious Day for America, and a Depressing Day for Democrats"
#
RUSH: Any good day for America and the US military and the war effort is a bad day for liberalism, a bad day for the Democrats.
#
RUSH: What's good for America is bad for the Democratic Party...
#
CALLER: Oh, thank you so much. This is such a wonderful day. I gotta tell you, whenever -- and I thought of this Jack Murtha, and you were so right to remind everybody that -- well, him and John Kerry both wanted like six months to get out, and that was over six months ago, and had we listened to them, we would not have this victory here today.

RUSH: Murtha still is saying we should get out in six months.

CALLER: Yeah. And when they were showing the rubble, the people digging things out of the rubble where Zarqawi was killed, they showed a little blue teddy bear and some little children's shoes, and I immediately thought of Murtha and how he accused our Marines of murdering in cold blood, and I just figured his response was going to be something like, you know, now we're still targeting children deliberately in cold blood to take out Zarqawi.

RUSH: Did you hear him say that or you just thought you heard?

CALLER: No, that was just going through my mind. See, I was watching --

RUSH: You've gotta give this time. They're not that dumb, but they can't help themselves. They'll have enough discipline to hold their fire on what they really think of all this for a day, but just be patient out there. It won't be long. They'll start asking the questions, "Was anything tortured?" When they learn that there was a detainee role played in this, when they learn that detainees offered intelligence -- meaning prisoners, wherever we're holding them -- you mark my words, "Were they tortured in any way?" I mean, some of the other things, folks, that you can expect to hear from assorted liberals over the course of the remainder of the week:

"Did we have to use violence? Couldn't we have tried diplomacy? Couldn't have we talked to Zarqawi?"

This, of course, is the voice of the "new castrati," as I call them, those who have been neutered and have no spine, backbone, or couple other things.

"What was the urgency? Couldn't we have offered a few carrots? We could have talked to him. Why did we have to do so quickly? Now the world is going to hate us! The world is going to hate us even more! Bush is destroying our image in the world. Now we're killing people and putting them on TV like we're happy about it! Haven't we learned that violence begets violence? I mean, if we had been mature, if we had been mature enough to leave and cut and run, then that man, Zarqawi, would be alive today, would be alive today, perhaps on the verge of rehabilitation -- and, I'll tell you what we've done. All we've done with this -- this is not a victory. This does not advance our cause. All we've done is create more terrorists. They're going to flock from the world over!"

You know what they're going to say, and then some of them are thinking, "We would have gotten Zarqawi a year sooner if Kerry were president," or "If we listened to Biden, or if Democrats were in power, Zarqawi would have never been in Iraq," blah, blah, blah, blah. You're going to hear themes, variations on all these themes in due course. Their first reaction when they heard it at home was a lump in the throat. I'm sure there's some exceptions to this, but the Democratic Party is just like the Drive-By Media.

They look at everything through the prism of politics and the politics today is: "How do we defeat Bush?" who is not even on the ballot. It's ridiculous. But nevertheless... It was probably the same when we captured Saddam. We captured Saddam? Oh, you know there was a lump in their throat there! (Choking sounds.) Choking and breath cut off for a while in stunned shock and disappointment.

I'm sure that in many, many quarters of the American left today and in certain sectors of the Democratic Party, there was an, "Oh, damn! Damn it! Just when we were on a roll! We've got Bush right where we want him; we had a moral victory in California 50. We've got a California governor nominee that is going to defeat Schwarzenegger. Oh, my God, we were going to take back the House. Damn it!"

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: One other quick point here before we have to go to the break -- we're going to move on to other things after this, but we'll still take calls from you. I know you want to weigh in on this. This is something the Drive-By Media and the American left will miss totally. This Zarqawi death today, it's not just a huge military victory, but it's a huge moral victory as well. One of the most brutal and evil men on the face of the earth is dead. That's a good thing all by itself quite apart from its impact on the war effort.

But just in terms of the morality of this, evil has lost. The bad guys have lost a big one here, and in addition to whatever military significance it has, it is an amazing moral victory as well -- and don't forget that, because you're not going to hear very many people in the Drive-By Media talking about "moral victories." Not this kind.

Link to Full Transcript...while it works...Rush has a habit of yanking transcripts and links...perhaps he does have second thoughts at times but I doubt it.

Someone should tell Rush Bush could have killed al-Zarqawi three years ago if he wanted to:

"Mr Bush had Zarqawi in his sights almost every day for a year before the invasion of Iraq and he didn't shoot because they were wining and dining the French in an effort to get them to assist us in the invasion of Iraq," he told Four Corners.

"Almost every day we sent a package to the White House that had overhead imagery of the house he was staying in. It was a terrorist training camp . . . experimenting with ricin and anthrax . . . any collateral damage there would have been terrorists."

During the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi's presence in the north of the country was used by US officials to link Saddam Hussein to terrorism.

source

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

How Bush Got His Swagger Back

While White House reports are down playing the killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi I can't help but think Bush was doing a load of fist pumping in the oval office while making new plans to go cut some brush down at Crawford. At the same time Bush was probably a little teary-eyed; after all he lost a valuable boogey man.

I still have to question the timing of all this though. Haditha has conveniently disappeared from the headlines. And despite The White House cautioning people not to think that somehow the insurgency in Iraq is truly in its last throes, the Right-Wingers are quickly grafting on to this event as a victory for the Bush Doctrine.

The Bush sycophants now having something to cheer for while Bush kicks his heels and gets back in to his Texas Swagger mode.

Seeing the success this small victory is bringing Bush, I wouldn't be surprised if we catch Bin Laden some time just before the mid-term elections.

After all, it was the Bush Administration that opted out of catching al-Zarqawi for an entire year. Why? Because we needed terrorists in Iraq to help justify the war. If Bush would have taken out al-Zarqawi prior to the Iraq war, his inner circle felt this would have weakened their case for war:

"Mr Bush had Zarqawi in his sights almost every day for a year before the invasion of Iraq and he didn't shoot because they were wining and dining the French in an effort to get them to assist us in the invasion of Iraq," he told Four Corners.

"Almost every day we sent a package to the White House that had overhead imagery of the house he was staying in. It was a terrorist training camp . . . experimenting with ricin and anthrax . . . any collateral damage there would have been terrorists."

During the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi's presence in the north of the country was used by US officials to link Saddam Hussein to terrorism.

source

We could have caught al-Zarqawi at any time just like we could catch Osama Bin Laden if we wanted to. We could also stop the insurgency in Iraq if it was a real concern for Bush but it's not.

Bush's concern is maintaining a permanent military conflict. It's good for his oil cronies, it's good for the war profiteers, and it's great for controling Americans. Having this indeffinate conflict out there against "terrorism" allows Bush to govern through fear.

Our military is the best and brightest in the world. Our Special Forces, Navy Seals, and CIA are capable of pulling off impossible feats. If allowed to, they could catch or kill all the terrorists. But they are hindered from doing their job by confliciting interests. Winning the "War on Terror" really does not benefit Bush.

This is why we continuously send our military in to clear out Iraqi towns of terrorists then we order our troops to leave allowing the terrorists to come back.

But the Bush Admininstration has run in to a sticky wickett the last couple of years. The war in Iraq has been killing his approval ratings. The perception around the world and in America is that we are losing the war.

But now with the convenient killing of Zarqawi it puts a little lipstick on the war pig making it seem like things are getting better.

If Bush knew what was good for him he would kill or capture as many terrorists between now and the mid-term elections. But God forbid the war in Iraq end before we have our giant fortress built and fully operational...

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Breaking: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi Dead

According to ABC News Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in a bombing raid. No links yet. Heard it on the news.

MSNBC has it as a headline at the top. Still no links but it's all over the TV now...

I'm off to bed...This is what, the 8th time Zarqawi has died?

Still nothing on the web but true to fashsion the TV News is going ape shit over it. So, if you care, turn on your TV and take a gander. MSNBC is going gang busters. Ofcourse I live on the West Coast so for many of you East Coasters, this is already old news.

Why is it taking so long to get the news on the internet? A new tactic to boost ratings?

Update:

Ok, some links:

How They Got Zarqawi:The Manhunt That Snared Him

Experts: Zarqawi death tough blow - but not fatal

Rumsfeld Says Al-Zarqawi Death Helps

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi killed in air raid

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

George H Bush fought war to oust Rumsfeld

"Former President George H.W. Bush waged a secret campaign over several months early this year to remove Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld," writes Sidney Blumenthal for Salon.com.

Excerpts from the article:

#
...The elder Bush went so far as to recruit Rumsfeld's potential replacement, personally asking a retired four-star general if he would accept the position, a reliable source close to the general told me. But the former president's effort failed, apparently rebuffed by the current president.

When seven retired generals who had been commanders in Iraq demanded Rumsfeld's resignation in April, the younger Bush leapt to his defense.

"I'm the decider and I decide what's best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain," he said. His endorsement of Rumsfeld was a rebuke not only to the generals but also to his father.

Continue Reading at Raw Story

I don't know, sounds like daddy issues to me. Dubya only wants Rummy to stay cause his dad wants Rummy to go. Daddy never let Dubya do what he wanted to do. He always had to listen to daddy. When now Dubya is The Decider and he ain't listening to daddy no more!

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Fortress America

Fortress America: cranes rise over the site of the new US embassy in Baghdad, due to be completed June.

Photo: Cox News Source: theage.com.au

Oliver Poole, Baghdad
June 8, 2006

ON THE west bank of the Tigris, at the edge of Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone, a forest of cranes marks the progress of Iraq's newest monument: a US embassy that will be the largest in the world.

Once an army of more than 3500 workers have completed construction next June, the vast site will be the hub of the American administration in Iraq.

Protected by five-metre-thick walls and ringed by military guards, it signals the seriousness of America's intentions to retain a large and long-term presence.

The $A790 million building's existence is meant to be a secret. But it is impossible to hide a complex that will be the size of Vatican City and have the population of a small town, especially when it is lit up at night to enable work to go on 24 hours a day. It takes nearly five minutes to drive along just one side of its 42 hectares, which will contain 21 buildings.

While Baghdad has erratic clean water supplies and intermittent electricity, the embassy will have its own water treatment plant and a generator.

The only details of what the completed complex will look like can be found in a recent US Senate Foreign Relations Committee report. The report also explains why such a luxurious site is needed: the State Department is finding it more and more difficult to persuade its employees to come to Iraq with its constant threat of violence.

There will be six blocks, with 619 one-bedroom flats, a recreation building, a beauty salon, gym, swimming pool and a school. A lavish "American Club" will provide a venue to relax and a site to host receptions.

An Iraqi newspaper questioned last month why the US had been given the embassy land for free.

Link To Article
#

We're never leaving Iraq...ever! Unless the Iraqis drive us out (hence the insurgency). This war is the biggest sham in history. We didn't go there to liberate Iraqis and spread democracy. We went there to subjugate Muslims, take their land, and steal their oil resources.

This so-called embassy, which is really a fortress, should turn the stomachs of all Americans. Rather than make sure the electricity is on in Baghdad, that Iraqis have clean water, or help creat jobs, Bush and his crony Republicans has instead chosen to build a fucking fortress. It will probably be called Bush Bunker or Decider Den. There will probably be a fucking statue of Bush out front with a plack from the "Iraqis" thanking him for removing Saddam from power.

Excuse me while I go puke.

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Fox News Neil Cavuto guest calls for bombing Iran immediately

From Media Matters:

Summary: On Fox News' Your World, Jonathan Hoenig, managing member of Capitalistpig Asset Management LLC, asserted that bombing Iran would raise the Dow Jones industrial average.

Hoening stated:

"[F]rankly, if you want to see the Dow go up, let's get the bombers in the air and neutralize this Iranian threat. We've gone to the negotiating table, we have danced around with these people" and "that's not going to help this country nor the stock market."

Watch the video at Media Matters

Posted by PoliShifter at 11:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Hermann Wilhem Goering's Ghost

Hermann Wilhelm Göring (also Goering in English) (January 12, 1893 – October 15, 1946) was a German politician and military leader known for being second in command of the Third Reich, a leading member of the Nazi party, and commander of the Luftwaffe. He was tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg Trials in 1945-1946 and sentenced to death. He avoided execution by committing suicide in his cell a few hours before the sentence was to be carried out.
- from Wikipedia

From Nuremberg Diary by Gustave Gilbert

Speaking to Goering:

We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

Resources:

Herman Goering snopes.com

Hermann Goering Wikipedia

The People no longer have a voice hence we now have war and we will have war until the people once again have a voice.

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

The Mark of the Beast is 616 NOT 666!!

Recent discoveries from the Oxyrhynchus papyrus hoard now indicates the mysterious number of the devil is not 666 but is actually 616.

I woke up this morning late thanks to my cats pinning me down on my bed and making me sleep through my alarm. I stumbled down stairs and started to brew some green tea and then fumbled for the remote to catch a little news.

Everywhere I turned all the news whores were talking about how today is "666 the day of the Devil!". Guests ranged from Priests to Christian fundamentalists to Ann Coulter pimping her latest book. Apparently The Omen was remade and is being released as well today.

All in all, 666 has turned in to a marketing bonanza.

There's just one problem: 666 is NOT the mark of the beast, 616 is!

About a year ago blogs everywhere were reporting on the Oxyrhynchus papyrus when the news first broke. I wrote about it on my other blog Revolutionary Paradigm in an article titled Christians Take Note: Mark of the Beast is 616 NOT 666.

Ofcourse most stories on this topic are based on an article written by Tom Anderson titled Revelation! 666 is not the number of the beast (it's a devilish 616).

The danger of these types of myths such as those that surround the number 666 is that there will always be a percentage of people who truly believe in them. I am sure there are many radicals walking around today convinced that the rapture will commence at any momment just as there were many who were certain Christ would come back in the year 2000.

The media as usual is not helping all of this. Instead of reporting the facts surrounding the number 666 they are simply hyping it up. This is to be expected since most media outlets are just corporate whores and today has turned in to just another corporate bonanza no different, though smaller in scale, than Easter or Christmas.

Meanwhile over the last 5 years corporate profits have doubled while wages have stayed nearly flat. How is that possible? It's easy to grow profits when you outsource, use cheap labor, pay poor wages, cut benefits, and raid pension funds.

The Financial Times Reports:

US companies have increased their share of the economic pie at a faster rate over the past five years than at any time since the second world war.

Recent government figures show that profits from current production as a share of national income have risen from 7 per cent in mid-2001 to 12.2 per cent at the start of this year. This rate of growth is unprecedented since collection of these figures began in 1947.

Profits have climbed by 123 per cent over the same period...

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

The Bombing of Iran to commence in 12 months

First I want to appologize to everyone. I was certain that we would be bombing Iran at the end of August. I thought this because:

a) Bush needs a serious boost in ratings
b) it would help boost gas and oil prices at the end of summer

I recently told a Persian friend of mine who will be traveling to Iran this summer to make sure he doesn't go in August.

Well, it turns out I was wrong.

Think Progress has video fo Bill Kristol, NeoCon extraordinare, Chairman of PNAC, whose father, Irving Kristol is considered The Godfather of NeoConservatism, on Fox News Bill Kristol on Sunday June 4th 2006 in so many words said that Bush will try diplomacy for 12 months and then there will be military action against Iran or we will allow them to have nukes.

Hmm? What do you think Bush will do? Diplomacy, let Iran have nuclear power, or bomb them? Hmm....

Keep in mind that while Kristol asserts that the decision will ultimately be made by the Bush Administration, that PNAC, the NeoCon ThinkTank founded and run by Kristol was a driving force in to getting the Bush Administration to invade Iraq. Take a look at PNAC's boad and you will see many familiar names including Rumsfeld, Cheney, Jeb Bush, Wolfowitz, and Bill Bennett.

So when Kristol says there will be military action in about 12 months against Iran, I'd say you can pretty much take that to the bank and cash the check now.

It is odd for Kristol to come out again swinging the NeoCon bat again especially after so many NeoCons including Kristol himself have acquiesced that the invasion of Iraq was poorly planned, ill-conceived, and that the occupation of Iraq is a disaster. Many NeoCons have admited that their domino theory of flowering Middle Eastern democracies with Iraq being the cornerstone was oversimplified and a pipedream.

So why has Kristol seemingly backtracked? Why is he back in the NeoCon saddle? Perhaps the NeoCons figure they have gone so far off in to the deep end that there is just no turning back any more.

More importantly Kristol recently said:

"Maybe we should have Supreme Leader Bush. I kind of like the sound of that."

video at Crooks and Liars

So perhaps Kristol has decided the best way to go now is to plunge our country and the entire world in to Fascism with Bush at the Helm (or Bush's handlers at least). Which would be convenient for Kristol since he happens to be one of Bush's handlers...

Posted by PoliShifter at 02:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

O'Reilly Blows a Gasket

I am not sure why but I find it hilarious to watch Loofa lose it.

Crooks and Liars has video of Loofa foaming at the mouth.

Posted by PoliShifter at 10:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0)

Baghdad Morgue Report for May: 1,398 dead bodies

Baghdad Morgue Reports Record Figures for May

Nearly 1,400 bodies were brought to the facility, the highest number since the war began.

By Louise Roug, Times Staff Writer

June 4, 2006

BAGHDAD — New Iraqi government documents show that, excluding the nearly daily bombings, more Baghdad residents died in shootings, stabbings and other violence in May than in any other month since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

The numbers, and accounts from residents, depict neighborhoods descending further into violence and fear.

Last month, 1,398 bodies were brought to the central morgue, according to Ministry of Health statistics, 243 more than in April. The count doesn't include soldiers or civilian victims of explosions, on whom autopsies are not usually conducted.

Since 2003, at least 30,240 bodies have been brought to the morgue, the vast majority of them victims of gunmen who are not caught or prosecuted. Bodies often lie in the streets for hours.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Iraq

Just remember to stay the course. Rumsfeld's doing a heckuva job.

Russian among 27 killed in Iraq

BAGHDAD, June 3: Gunmen killed one Russian embassy employee and kidnapped four others in Baghdad on Saturday, in the latest attack on foreigners in the lawless capital.

A car bomb in the southern city of Basra killed at least 27 people, hospital sources said, three days after new Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced a security crackdown there.

North of Baghdad, gunmen killed six Iraqi policemen in an attack on a checkpoint in the town of Baquba, in a religiously mixed and volatile area.

Continue Reading

Iraq looks a little more like Vietnam every day

Western clothes are death sentence

NOOR and her boyfriend used to go out a lot and listen to dance in their favourite restaurant in Baghdad. The 26-year-old university lecturer also used to enjoy going window shopping at night in the city’s once-glitzy Mansour district, dressed in the latest fashions.

That was before the “men in black”, the Taliban-style militias waging terror against the urban middle class, arrived in Noor’s neighbourhood, threatening to shoot, kidnap and shave the heads of anyone who challenged their draconian strictures.

Continue Reading

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Sanctity of Marriage

If Bush, the Republicans, Conservatives, and Right-Wingers truly wanted to protect The Sanctity of Marriage they would ban divorce.

Divorce is the number one issue that causes people to not take marriage seriously. Marriage is no longer a life long committment. It's more like a legal live-in monogomous (sometimes) relationship. More than half of all marriages end in divorce.

I challenge Congress to pass a Constitutional Amendment banning divorce. Do this and you will see that people will take marriage more seriously.

Sure, the number of people getting married may plummet, but those that do get married won't get divorced.

In all honesty what I don't understand is how someone can get married and divorced over and over yet this doesn't affect the "institution" of marriage. Yet if two people of the same sex want to marry, all of a sudden this "threatens" our "traditions".

I'd say getting divorced and marrying the other woman is more of an American Tradition than marriage is.

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

George Bush Having an Affair with Condi Rice....QUICK RIGHTWINGERS, IMPEACH HIM!!

How can the Christian GOP stand for this? Isn't this a slap in the face of the sacred institution of marriage? Someone find Kenneth Starr and start an investigation! There's bound to be a few stained dresses, cigars,and bottles of Jm Beam around some where!

Wayne Madsen reports:

June 1, 2006 -- Rocky shoals for Bush marriage? Informed sources Inside the Beltway report that First Lady Laura Bush has established temporary residence in the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC as a result of a tiff with President Bush over an extramarital relationship involving her husband. Mr. Bush's tryst is said to involve Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

It is not known how long Mrs. Bush plans to remain at the Mayflower, however, her security detail has been present at the hotel during hours when the First Lady would normally be residing in the White House. While she was National Security Adviser, Rice, who has never been married, referred to George W. Bush as "my husband" before she corrected herself and said, "the president." Rice was speaking at a dinner when she made her "husband" remarks.

Would Bush Affair with Rice Be Impeachable Offense?

Did Quixtar-backed Bush have affair with Rice? And how did Amway-backed Blackwell play role in rigging Bush re-election in Ohio?

Posted by PoliShifter at 08:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

Flabergasted

I don't even know what to think anymore about this country. The Republicans who are suposed to be all about Homeland Security actually decided to CUT funding for New York City and Washington DC citing that these two cities are not primary targets for terrorists!!

Hello! What two cities were attacked on 9/11? Instead cities like Omaha and Charlotte, Republican Strongholds, are getting massive increases in Homeland Security Funding.

How can any so-called Republican go along with this?

Being a Republican is not about fiscal responsibility, State's Rights, and small government. Being Republican is purley about cronyism. This current crop of GOP politicians along with the Bush Administration have made it clear that only those who vote Republican will get funding of any kind.

How can you not fund Washinton DC and New York City for Homeland Security? How is that possible?

9/11 is the Republican Mantra. They want us all to be very afraid of the next potential terror attack. And yet the two cities that were attacked, that are likely still targets, don't get any protection. Why? Because they are predominantly Democrat.

I don't know what's worse: That Republicans are only funding Republican Strongholds for Homeland Security, that the so-called "Christian Right" isn't standing up for our brothers and sisters, or that the majority of Americans just don't seem to give a shit and will roll with whatever the GOP does.

Posted by PoliShifter at 07:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The GOP's Big Gay Flaming Flag Platform

In a previous post I wrote about how Big Gay Al from South Park was excited about the Republican's Big Gay platform because he likes Big Things.

I wrongly thought that the GOP platform for 2006 was only going to consist of gay marriage and abortion. I was wrong. There are really three planks to the GOP platform that are clearly THE MOST pressing issues facing America: Gay marriage, Abortion, AND Flag Burning.

That's right, the do-nothing Congress who has worked the least amount of days of any Congress since the late 1940's is going to spend their precious session time trying to amend The Constitution.

What are they going to try to do? Balance the budget? Feed the troops? Rebuild New Orleans? Address gas prices? Work on healthcare? Discourage outsourcing? Nope.

What they are going to do is try to amend The Constitution to ban flag burning and define marriage as only between a man and a woman.

We all know these amendments won't pass. But what it does, by forcing a vote, is give the GOP campaign fodder. Every Democrat that votes against these ridiculous Constitutional Amendments will be painted as someone who burns flags and marries gays.

This is all geared toward simply energizing what is left of the Republican base. These are the people who vote Republican religiously. And while they could care less about soldiers dying in Iraq or the people of New Orleans, the 3 things they do care about, abortion, gay marriage, and flag burning, will surely drive them to the voting booths.

Posted by PoliShifter at 04:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Special Edition: The BushTrix Trilogy Box Set

Back by popular demand, now you can view the BushTrix in its entirety in one convenient box set. Fully restored and digitally enhanced, all three BushTrix installments are available now! And best of all, they are free!

Welcome To The BushTrix

Welcome to the BushTrix where All is not what it seems. Where propaganda is repeated and catapulted until it becomes true. A world where freedom means tyranny and democracy is spread by military force. A world where lies are transfromed into truths. A world where a Culture of Life actually means the Spreading of Death. Can you escape the BushTrix before you end up at Gitmo?

The BushTrix Reloaded

Just when you thought the world could not get any more bizarre it hits you...You are trapped in the BushTrix Reloaded and you can't escape. The BushTrix is a world where terrorist groups seize democratic control of nations while the President applauds victory.

The BushTrix is a world where Condescending Rice tells everyone "...the weapon of choice for every authoritarian regime is the organized cruelty of the police state" while at the same time turning a blind eye to Gitmo and Abu Ghraib. The BushTrix is a world where NewsWeek can be blamed for all our woes in the Middle East.

In the BushTrix, it does not matter that the Koran was desecrated, it only matters that a Koran was not litterally flushed down a toilet.

In the BushTrix, Amnesty International can be called upon to provide data to support the invasion of Iraq and then later condemed for speaking out against the BushTrix.

In The BushTrix, Democracy is spread through military power, freedom is limited to the BushTrix citizens for their own good; in order to protect them from terrorists.

In The BushTrix, even if the Downing Street Minutes are completely true and the Bush Administration was planning the Iraq War long before the actual war while fixing the intelligence to fit the premise for war, it does not matter. The ends justify the means. Clearly the Bushtrix has spread to the Middle East and the Iraqi People are enjoying tremendous democracy and peace right now.

If you do not like the BushTrix then you can go to Gitmo where all the traitors will eventually end up. Do not underestimate the BushTrix.

The BushTrix Revolutions

You were alseep in your bed; you had a normal job, a normal life, a normal wife, and normal kids. And then you woke up and found yourself in...

The BushTrix Revolutions

While you were not paying attention and just going about your every day life the media suddenly became right wing. The Radical Winger Republicans took over the House and the Senate while you happily minded your own business...

One day you looked up only to find that all newly appointed judges were all radical wingers. You noticed that lying about war was a good thing as long as Democracy was being spread. And you realized that torture is OK as long as only the United States does it.

Then you began to see the spread of the BushTrix to all corners of the realm. Evolution was no longer being taught in schools in favor of creationism. The "Culture of Life" prevents the BushTrix from allowing Stem Cell Research while at the same time the BushTrix will happily spend federal dollars to spread death in Iraq.

The BushTrix tells you Social Security is worthless. The BushTrix tells you it needs the right through the Patriot Act 2 to access your mail and banking records without your knowledge in order to protect you from the Terrorists. Meanwhile, the BushTrix does nothing to stop terrorists from crossing our borders every day.

The BushTrix tells you that spreading freedom and democracy is a priority all the while limiting your own personal freedom and expression of democracy.

Yes, while you were busy waving your American Flag in the ultimate show of patriotism the BushTrix Revolutions sprang up all around you and you didn't even notice. The BushTrix is one party, one system, controlled by one Man.

Who can stop the BushTrix and wake the people from the nightmare they are unaware they are living in?

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Bush: "You're seeing robust diplomacy"

I watched a a little of Bush on TV talking about supposed diplomacy with Iran. If you read what Bush said, it does sound like Bush is softening his stance a little bit on Iran.

But if you watch him on TV, it is painfully obvious he still wants to bomb Iran. It takes every bit of strength for him to maintain his composure while talking about Iran. He slows way down and carefully picks his words. I can see his face redden as he angers.

All he knows is his fake bravado cowboy swagger. He is not a diplomat. He is a mad man put in charge of our entire military. He is drunk with power and thinks all he has to do is threaten to bomb someone and they will comply.

Perhaps if the United States invasion of Iraq had gone smoothly and been successful Bush could then make a case for force. But Bush has been relegated to a paper tiger due to the misuse and overextension of our military.

All Bush has left are nuclear weapons to negotiate with. This probably doesn't upset him too much since his largest wet dream occurs when visualizes nuking some Islamic country.

US willing to talk with Iran about nuclear program

Bush: Security Council Could Loom for Iran

Posted by PoliShifter at 09:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)