Mike Luckovich

By LuckoDull

January 29, 2007 07:54 AM | Link to this

1960 era Democrats:

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.- John F. Kennedy, Inuaguration Day 1960.

2000 era pinkos:

Do this for me, do that for me, waaaahhhhhh!!!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

By TW

January 29, 2007 08:05 AM | Link to this

If fishing and football were education and foreign policy – there would be no GOP as we know it today. This country desperately needs the reemergence of the true conservative to strengthen its debate. Sadly, the voice of fiscal responsibility and military prowess, the much needed watchdog for the other side of the aisle, sat back and allowed itself to be infiltrated by the small group of clowns who’ve put this country into a pole.

By mb

January 29, 2007 08:14 AM | Link to this

… and if you’re planning to fish on Sunday, bring your beer with you.

By Neo-Democrat

January 29, 2007 08:30 AM | Link to this

^ LuckoDull is quoting Demmocrats this morning. Must have been a hard weekend for the little guy. Maybe he’s still tryin to convince us that Republicans are really Neo-Democrats. Yeh right Dull, suuuuuuure they are!

By @@

January 29, 2007 08:47 AM | Link to this

Gee ml, I knew some staunch Democrats that voted for Sonny, but you’re a “big guy” Democrat with a “small” left brain, right?

I see your true colors shining through. They’re black and white, never red, white and blue.

By Silly Rabbit

January 29, 2007 08:54 AM | Link to this

I minored in psyche in college, and that’s how I know for sure that luckodull is insane. Now, insanity usually requires a battery of tests to determine, but my training reveals to me that this guy is special, and needs no further testing.

and I think it’s a shame that his mother didn’t raise him to be a nicer girl.

By Shawny

January 29, 2007 09:38 AM | Link to this

So, let’s go back in time and look at previous GA governors…does anyone recall one that had answers for bold solutions to education, healthcare, and transportation?

anyone?

Bueller?

McFly?

But now we have a Republican governor, cartoon boy gets to draw (rather smallish, I might add) the chief and take a jab.

I have to wonder…if Taylor had won, and made no major efforts to solve the three biggies…would we have a cartoon with an undersize Taylor giving a wise-a$$ answer to the “meaning of life” question.

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 09:42 AM | Link to this

Ahh, Lucko-Curl - Here are a couple of quotes from Ronald Reagan’s farewell address in 1989:

“I’m out there stumping to help future presidents - Republican or Democrat - get those tools they need to bring the budget under control. And those tools are a line-item veto and a constitutional amendment to balance the budget. Second, I’m out there talking up the need to do something about political gerrymandering. This is the practice of rigging the boundaries of congressional districts. It is the greatest single blot on the integrity of our nation’s electoral system, and it’s high time we did something about it.”

“Ours was the first revolution in the history of mankind that truly reversed the course of government, and with three little words: “We the people.” “We the people” tell the government what to do, it doesn’t tell us. “We the people” are the driver, the government is the car. And we decide where it should go, and by what route, and how fast. Almost all the world’s constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which “We the people” tell the government what it is allowed to do. “We the people” are fee. This belief has been the underlying basis for everything I’ve tried to do these past eight years.”

Of course this was followed 12 years later with this jewel:

Dick Cheney: ‘Reagan showed us that Deficits don’t matter…’

Seems you have forgotten the important aspects of conservatism…

By Dusty

January 29, 2007 09:57 AM | Link to this

Ho hum,

Another “little fellow”one this morning. I guess Luckovich is tired of putting “little” Bush in the big chair at the desk so now it is Perdue.

Maybe next time he can put Perdue in the sinking ship he puts out every other month. Oh well. What’s new? NOTHING! Same ol’ stuff.

By DebbieDoRight

January 29, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this

Sadly, the voice of fiscal responsibility and military prowess

Two great examples of an oxymoron:

Conservative/Fiscal Responsibility

and Conservative/Military prowess!!!

Class dismissed.

By DebbieDoRight

January 29, 2007 10:13 AM | Link to this

I’m out there stumping to help future presidents - Republican or Democrat - get those tools they need to bring the budget under control.

It took a democrat to do it, (get the budget under control), — and exactly 6 months after the democrat left office and handed the job to a republican; it took a republican to put us back into debt. Fiscal conservatives…………??

By Mike

January 29, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

The AJC’s philosophy is simple:

Liberal good. Conservative bad.

How enlightened!

By Mrs. Godzilla

January 29, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this

Sonny IS the joke.

Woo Hoo! We’re # 48! (in education that is)

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this

DDR,

Would you like to elaborate on that please? It was the Republican Congress with the 1994 Contract for America that put the budget under control. Clinton was President, but it was their initiative that did it. They cut something like 30 billion dollars from Federal spending, while Liberals screamed and cried that the sky was falling.

How could “a Republican”, which I assume refers to GWBush put us “into debt exactly 6 months later”? What are you basing this statement on?

Keep in mind that Clinton ended his term with the stock market tanking which left W with a recession. Then we had 9/11 which was brutal to the economy. We are now paying for the war on terror.

Despite all that, our deficit only represents 1.5% of GDP and is continuously going down as the Bush tax cuts generate more revenue.

I do agree that spending was out of control in the last congress, but any suggestion that Democrats are fiscal conservatives is a joke. JFK was the last conservative Democrat President, and there are very few of them in Congress. Their solutions inevitably involve raising taxes which just kill economic growth.

By Jesus

January 29, 2007 10:32 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!

By LMAO

January 29, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this

“I do agree that spending was out of control in the last congress…”

LMAO!!!!!

By ed lorenzo

January 29, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Overheard at the White House “George, all we need now is for Venezuela to announce that they plan to develop their nuclear industry, or ‘nucular’, as some people I know pronounce the word. .”

“First Lady, it is too early to milk the cow. Wait till I have had my morning pretzel. What did you say about Venezuela?”

“Just a rumor. Something the people in your State Department have not yet learned to listen to, evaluate and assimilate. Hugo has not said so but has intimated in a round about way that his country must think that their oil is not going to last forever and that some alternative form of energy must be developed”

“Is that the fellow that called me the devil at the UN?”

“The one and only. To some Venezuelans he is also the devil, while for others he is the “divina pomada”, as they say in Caracas (divine ointment). He is the first president in a century that has embarked on major social reforms, you know, housing, jobs, health care, education, etc.; while there is the usual circle of sharks feeding at the oil ponds, there is a bit of that going to the poor”

“Next, you will make a saint out of him, First Lady. Isn’t he the one that said that the Iraq disaster is the result of my failed policies?, that I went to war without a strategy, that I went there prematurely, that I did not have enough troops nor adequate equipment ? Did he also say that I am now sending 17,500 young Americans with bulls eyes on their back in the middle of a city of 6.5 million people without a plan?”

“I wonder why he called you the devil!”

By AntiRadical

January 29, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

OK toon ML. Can’t say that I like Sonny but I, also, can’t say that I think he has done a bad job.

I see Sonny as a mediocre administrator with limited vision who, like most Reps, carries the weight of the radical right agendas that have perverted the Rep party platform and caused them to lose their focus. Unfortunately, Sonny continues to pursue some of those devicive fringe element wedge issues, himself (we will never agree on funding for stem cell research, for instance). Otherwise, like the President, Sonny has been unfortunate enough to have acquired power at a historically inopportune moment in history.

Shawney- Georgia has progressed very nicely under it’s many recent administrations. Miller’s GA lottery to fund higher eductaion comes to mind. Will the DOT ever stop “improving” I285? The GA aqarium has opened under Perdue’s stewardship and is drawing many thousands of tourist dollars and industry investment to our state, regardless of it’s recent flaps with exhibit deaths. There are many other examples.

I think that all recent governors have contributed solutions to the big three problems and unlike in the national political arena, I think that the contributions have yielded mostly positive results at acceptable costs.

By SusieHomeMaker

January 29, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

GWB has made the US into a “banana republic”. A banana republic is one of those places where 1 in 5 of the dollars spent by the government is borrowed, the trade deficit exceeds 6% of GNP.

The U.S. just raised the debt limit to $8.2 trillion, that is, the total amount of dollars the U.S. owes; can owe holders of U.S. government debt instruments. Well, 7.9 trillion is what the U.S. owes bondholders, but it has promised much more to its citizens. U.S. Comptroller General David Walker reported “the federal government’s fiscal exposures now total more than $46 trillion, up from $20 trillion in 2000.” So, amazingly, most of that debt was incurred by the current administration.

Federal revenue peaked at $2.03 trillion in 2000 and then fell. Expenditures were $2.47 trillion in 2005, an alarming 38.2% above the federal government’s expenditures in 2000. Even in constant 2000 dollars this was a 21.8% increase over the five years from 2000 to 2005. The administration supported both massive outlays and tax cuts.

By Congressional President

January 29, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this

BD @10:27- “JFK was the last conservative Democrat President, and there are very few of them in Congress.”

How many conservative Republican Presidents are in Congress? LOL

By Congressional President

January 29, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this

AntiRadical @ 10:59- historically inopportune moment in history

What historically inopportune monents are not in history? LOL

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this

Dusty, other than endless b!tching about Mike’s cartoons, have you contributed anything at all to this universe?

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this

Of course Muffin is [wrong about deficit}(http://zfacts.com/p/318.html). The deficit decline “trend” is exactly 1 year long, after 5 years of it increasing.

By Dusty

January 29, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this

Yes, rushncap,

I offer support to the government of our country and the state of Georgia. You oughta try it, at least the country anyway.

Even Anti-Radical made a few positive remarks today. But he kept in full control of himself so as not to overdo it.

By DebbieDoRight

January 29, 2007 11:29 AM | Link to this

Danish: In 2000 Clinton announced record payment on the Gross National Debt. Read article here:

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/01/clinton.debt/

Clinton also stated,(same article):

“We should take advantage of this historic opportunity to use the benefits of debt reduction to extend the life of Social Security, (I think Dubya recommended that the US start an “investment” club for Social security) and Medicare and pay off the entire national debt by 2013 for the first time since Andrew Jackson was president,” Clinton said.

Clinton has asked Congress to dedicate the interest savings from paying down the national debt to the Social Security Trust Fund, which will add 54 years to its life, according to White House estimates.

Clinton also used the announcement to take issue with Republican tax cut plans, noting that “the debt quadrupled in the twelve years before I came into office,” a reference to his Republican predecessors, Ronald Reagan and George Bush

“We should not jeopardize the longest economic expansion in history with risky tax cuts that threaten our fiscal discipline,” said Clinton.

Dubya’s take on Budgets and Planning:

THE PRESIDENT’S BUDGET: THE CONTEXT; Surplus Feast: Will Tax-Cut Appetizer Leave Room for Debt-Slice Dessert? By DAVID E. SANGER

Analysis of Pres Bush’s budget and tax-cut plans; unlike Pres Clinton, who sought to cut debt first and see what was left for tax cuts, Bush’s approach is reverse: cutting taxes first and then using what is left for debt reduction.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00C12FA345C0C728CDDAA0894D9404482&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fC%2fClinton%2c%20Bill

When Clinton left office the economy was healthy and the debt was down. Clinton was the one who maneuvered Newt Gingrich, (then head GOP) into making sure he’d support his new tax initiative in order for the proposed senate/house pay raise to go through. The REPUBLICANS did not come up with the notion to balance the budget or cut the national debt!! As you see

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this

Congrssional Democrat,

There are very few conservative Democrats in Congress.

Got it?

By AntiRadical

January 29, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this

Susie- Good post. Reps have abandoned their stated fiscal policy in order to chase wedge issues. The conservative platform was never the problem according to recent polls; the problem was that Reps surrendered the platform to the Dems, and now the Dems are running with it.

Time will tell if Dems have learned that it is moderates who decide elections in todays political climate. It is a lesson that Reps ignored.

By LuckoDull

January 29, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

By AntiRadical January 29, 2007 11:30 AM Susie- Good post. Reps have abandoned their stated fiscal policy in order to chase wedge issues.

Look at what a lib considers “abandoning fiscal policy:”

ATLANTA – Governor Sonny Perdue announced today that the state of Georgia has a $580 million budget surplus for FY06. Governor Perdue’s top priorities for the budget surplus are education and increasing the state’s rainy day fund. Revenue collections for FY06 increased 9.3 percent over FY05.

Those lies roll off your lips so easily, Spammie.

Either that or your ignorance does.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

DDR and rushncap darling,

The National Debt and the Federal Budget Deficit are not the same thing.

Check this out and read the “Frequently Asked Questions.

Can I include you two as supporters of the Fair Tax?

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

Dusty — yes, you “support the government”, if by that you mean you post a bunch of quasi-patriotic gibberish on a blog. Wow. Am I invited to your Congressional Medal of Freedom awarding ceremony? I guess your only real use is that you vote as you’re told. Which is nice for your puppet masters.

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this

DDR and rushcnap darling,

Federal Budget Deficit News:

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said last week the fiscal 2006 deficit narrowed to $248 billion from $319 billion in the previous year and a record $413 billion in 2004. In August, the agency had predicted a $260 billion shortfall.

By Sonny's Doo List

January 29, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

Lighten up folks. Go fishing.

Georgia will soon be the fishing capitol of the world. I have a plan to make Georgia famous. Folks we’re going to build ourselves a fishin stadium.

That’s right, we are going to build a 92,000 seat stadium (same as Sanford) right on top of Lake Lanier. Right smack dab in the middle of the lake.

All the major fishing tournaments will soon be ours. The National Fishing League (NFL) will play its 2010 all star game right here in Georgia. The Super Fish Bowl is a guarantee in 2111.

Who knows, maybe the National Assoc. of Stadium Carp (NASCARP) will put their Hall of Fame here!

The Georgia Aquarium is going to sponsor an annual Beluga whale hunt at Fishin Stadium. (limited to 20,000 participants)

(You gay men and your anti fish attitudes should please stay home)

Cost? Don’t worry, we are using the Georgia Wildlife Preservation license plate fee. (And Metro Atlanta tax dollars. Of course.)

Yours truly, Sonny

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this

Sorry Muffin, I’m not rich enough yet to support “Fair Tax”. And I like American economy too much to go for it.

And I’m realistic enough to know it has less than a snowball’s chance in hell of ever passing.

By LMAO

January 29, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this

Just a quarter trillion dollars of debt in ‘06? LMAO!!!

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this

Great link, Muffin. So Bush’s achievement, as far as you can understand is that even though he lead us to record deficits in 2004, the fact that it’s slightly lower now makes him a genius. That’s like if a basketball loses by 45, their loss by only 40 the next day is comparatively a success.

By Dusty

January 29, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

My patriotism is not “quasi”, cutie pie. Sorry, but you are not invited to any get-together of mine. I would be embarrassed by your white flag.

Now get those test tubes cleaned like you are told to do, which is nice for your supervisor.

By LuckoDull

January 29, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

rushncap: The 9/11 attacks and war on terror probably had no effect on the 2004 deficit, did they?

Sort of like “evolution” being a fact even though you have no proof of it, huh?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

By Dept of Fair Tax Services

January 29, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this

Due to the cost of the Iraq war the national sales tax will increase. Starting next month the tax will rise from 30% to 58%.

God Bless You. And have a nice day.

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 12:25 PM | Link to this

Lucko-Curl -

I’d say the War in Iraq…

the continuation of tax cuts in a time of war…

and out-of-control spending with no restraint…

had the biggest impact on the 2004 deficit.

Geez, you’re retarded, aren’t you?

By AntiRadical

January 29, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

Yes LuckoDull, I believe that the Reps have abandoned their stated fiscal policy as do the majority of American voters. Still didn’t get that November wake-up call?

No-bid contracts, record deficits, an over-extended military, tax cuts unbalanced by spending cuts, and an economy propped up by funds borrowed from Red China are not conservative principles. The American voter is not nearly as naive as you imagine.

By DebbieDoRight

January 29, 2007 12:32 PM | Link to this

National Debt by President The national debt peaked at 120% of GDP in 1946 due to the war effort, but Roosevelt, Truman, Ike, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, and Carter all did their part to bring the national debt back to pre-war levels. By the beginning of 1981, the national debt had fallen to 32.5% of GDP. Then, Reagan took office and the national debt took off. It rose non-stop for 12 years to 66.3% at the end of Bush’s term, erasing 25 years of progress in paying down the national debt. [Percent contributed by president.] (http://zfacts.com/p/480.html)

By DebbieDoRight

January 29, 2007 12:36 PM | Link to this

DDR and rushncap darling, The National Debt and the Federal Budget Deficit are not the same thing

Nope — not according to definition. But they sure look a lot alike!

http://fms.treas.gov/mts/mts1206.pdf

Check this out and read the “Frequently Asked Questions.

Went to your website and found a LOT of great quotes:

A politician cannot spend one dime on any spending project without first taking that dime from the person who earned it. So, when a politician votes for a spending bill he is saying that he believes the government should spend that particular dollar rather than the individual who worked for it.” Neal Boortz.

“There is no such thing as government money - only taxpayer money.” William Weld, quoted in Readers Digest

By DebbieDoRight

January 29, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

Sorry — here goes link:

http://zfacts.com/p/480.html

By Blackadder

January 29, 2007 12:59 PM | Link to this

“Liberal good. Conservative bad.” -Mike 10:17

Now you’re catching on.

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 01:02 PM | Link to this

Actually if the opponent is of equal strength, losing by 40 is an improvement over losing by 45. Just like if we kill 45 terrorists in Iraq today it would be an improvement if we had only killed 40 yesterday.

rushncap,

What convoluted logic says you don’t support the Fair Tax because you aren’t rich enough? Do you even know what it is?

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 01:03 PM | Link to this

On a sad note, Barbaro was euthanized today

By AntiRadical

January 29, 2007 01:07 PM | Link to this

Debbie- Good link. Very interesting claim that “all Presidents since WWII contributed to paying down the WWII debt until Reagan”, and that a portion of the WWII debt still exists today despite our writing off large portions of the WWII debt owed to us by Axis countries like Germany and Japan (not to mention the debts owed by our “allies”, of course).

It should make us all acutely aware when creating debt that our children’s children may not be prosperous enough to pay it. The biggest problem today is that we are bearing the burden of debt alone. The rest of the world would not finance what it viewed as expansionist American colonialism. This then creates a huge economic advantage to non-contributor countries in the never-ending global economic “war” between peaceful trading nations, a war we are slowly losing.

See everyone another day.

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 01:09 PM | Link to this

Alexander Panov, who served on the Dmitry Donskoy nuclear submarine, started growing cannabis on the window sill of the barracks over a year ago, Russian news agencies reported.

A string of accidents in the Russian navy, including the sinking of the Kursk nuclear submarine in 2000, have underlined the post-Soviet decline of Russia’s armed forces.

Do you think rushncap serves on the Dmitry and just calls it his lab?

By Theodore Roosevelt

January 29, 2007 01:13 PM | Link to this

The President should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole.

Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile.

To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 01:27 PM | Link to this

GOP Stalls On Minimum Wage To Avoid Iraq Votes The majority of Senate Republicans filibustering and delaying the passage of a new minimum wage law may be heartless, but they’re not dumb. They know that bumping the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour is enormously popular with the American people and they’re also aware that it passed by huge numbers in the House of Representatives, with 80 Republicans voting in favor of helping the working poor.

So why the stalling? Why put off the inevitable with over 100 nonsensical amendments, while already voting once against ending debate on a clean minimum wage bill?

Well, folks, it’s kind of like the Seinfeld episode, where George Costanza knows his girlfriend is about to break up with him so he just ducks her — breaks dates, pretends he’s not home, doesn’t answer the phone, reasoning that if he can stall her by not being available, she can’t break up with him.

Except in this case, the Republicans figure that if they can keep the Senate occupied indefinitely with an open-and-shut thing like a minimum wage increase, they can avoid the thing they fear most — having to vote on any of the myriad Iraq-war resolutions waiting in the wings.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 01:28 PM | Link to this

A letter from the march on Washington Posted by BobcatJH in General Discussion: Politics Mon Jan 29th 2007, 11:31 AM “Thank you for coming to take care of your country,” shouted Rep. Maxine Waters to a rapturous response. It wasn’t even 10:30 in the morning - the official march hadn’t even started and the scores of concerned citizens hadn’t even fully assembled - yet you could tell it was going to be a special day. And it was. It was a day of engaging speeches and engaged Americans. A day for taking stock and taking power. A day of hope and optimism. It was hard to disagree Saturday when someone would yell, “This is what democracy looks like.” Because it is. It looks like tens of thousands of Americans of every stripe giving voice to an idea - ending the Iraq war - overwhelmingly more popular than the alternative. It looks like veterans and active-duty military speaking truth to the Commander-in-Chief. It looks like so many staying behind to lobby their elected officials and work long after to bring our troops home. Saturday, our presence in Washington showed that we, not the misguided hawks still standing behind the war, reflect the will of the people. And no one - no pundit, politician or counter-protester - could convince anyone otherwise.

Joining Waters at the pre-march rally sponsored by CODEPINK we attended were her fellow elected officials, Reps. Lynn Woolsey and Dennis Kucinich, actors Sean Penn and Jane Fonda (among others), veterans and families of those currently serving in Iraq. For an hour, we gathered to raise our voices in support for ending this war. While the words of Waters, Woolsey and Kucinich were very inspiring, most effective were those of a 21-year-old. Oriana Futrell, a native of Spokane, Washington, came to the protest carrying a sign that read, “Bring my husband home now!” Her husband, an Army lieutenant, is currently serving in Baghdad. “My husband deployed last June to Iraq,” said Futrell, emotion in her voice. “He is an Army infantry officer currently patrolling the streets of Baghdad. And I just have to say I’m sick of attending the funerals of my friends. I have seen the weeping majors. I have seen the weeping colonels. I am sick of the death.” When she finished, there wasn’t a dry eye in sight.

Quick aside: A staple, of course, of any such protest is the right-wing counter-protest. And Saturday’s march was no d

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 01:29 PM | Link to this

From the pre-march rally, we walked the several blocks from the Navy Memorial to the National Mall, where we met with the other constituent groups and thousands of other attendees to hear from numerous speakers, including many of those we had heard at the previous event. After nearly two hours of impassioned speeches, spirited chanting and informative dialogue - including fiery rhetoric from Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson and Rep. John Conyers - those in attendance began to queue for the march, the route set to take everyone by the Capitol. Looking back from our position near the front of the marchers and later from a perch above the fray, it appeared to us that the group stretched for quite a distance. One hundred thousand participants, we decided, was a conservative estimate. Turnout aside, do our actions still matter as the online world becomes the preeminent force in the progressive movement?

Now that we’ve entered the digital age of people-powered politics, one ponders the usefulness of analog activism, which we saw Saturday. As a participant (like you) in both, I have found there’s still something to be said for a massive show of force. Call it nonviolent shock and awe. Because in each and every one of us Saturday is a fire, a desire to take things far beyond the day’s march. To Monday’s lobbying day, for instance. To support and promote candidates who represent our interests, not those of the cautious, the timid, the purveyors of the Beltway conventional wisdom that helped get us into this mess in the first place. To reconnect online with those we met Saturday, people from Texas, New Hampshire, Minnesota and Arkansas, among many other states.

What brought us all to our nation’s capital for the march? Netroots organization, something that shows me that the days of the massive protest aren’t yet numbered. Instead, it shows me that the large-scale event can and should remain one of many arrows in our progressive quiver, like targeted fundraising, candidate recruitment, messaging and rapid response. Each tactic has its strength, just like each has its weaknesses. Saturday’s march, for instance, was successful at bringing people together and painting a picture of exactly how strong the progressive movement is. How diverse it is. How much potential it has. When we looked around Saturday, like we have before, staring back at us were men and women of every age, every race, every economic gro

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 01:29 PM | Link to this

If I have one complaint about Saturday’s rally and others like it I’ve seen and attended in the past, it’s this: Message control. If the goal of the protest was to stand in opposition to escalation specifically and the disastrous Iraq war in general, I see no value in discussing - both by the speakers and those in the crowd via their signs - the Israel/Palestine situation. Both that and the myriad other tangential rallying cries heard Saturday may and do indeed have merit, but not if your goal is an overwhelming show of opposition to a specific policy. To wit: When I go to a basketball game, I’m not also expecting to see a baseball, football, hockey and soccer game erupt. Great, maybe, but not what I paid for. Now, at the same time, the same can be said for the progressive blogosphere. Having a big tent filled with numerous interests isn’t a problem. Staying focused is.

That said, watching the local Washington media this weekend and in reading other accounts of the protest, I find fault with the coverage of the event. The dominant frame through which the media view the protest movement - and, often, progressive activism itself - is as a sideshow, a colorful tapestry comprising ex-hippies, dreadlocked potheads and militant communists. One television reporter expressed surprise that active-duty military took part in the protest. Another newspaper account made a passing reference to marijuana use. One photo in the print edition of the Washington Post depicted three young people dancing. Above, editors placed a photo of a twentysomething male veteran, an amputee, heckling an anti-war speaker. The latter image screamed “serious and sober”; the former didn’t. Not pictured in the pages of the Post, however, was Futrell. There was no message more serious - or personal - Saturday than hers.

Criticizing the media, though, is easy. With rare exception, coverage of anything of note is shoddy at best, blatantly biased at worst. So, with an event like Saturday’s march, the media approach their reporting armed both with the traditional frame and what we, the marchers, give them. Give them a mishmash of issues that obscures an effective core and they report on the color of the event, not the substance. The solution, then? Either give them a clearer picture or think about different models of activism. This isn’t to decry at all Saturday’s march, but, like anything, we must always be evalua

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 01:30 PM | Link to this

Questions like these, though they may produce difficult answers, are important, because what we’re fighting for is so important. Important, too, is that we maximize the impact of our actions. I would like to see the massive protest remain vital if for no other reason than to consistently remind people that, yes, it’s more than alright to voice our dissent; it’s our duty. Also, because the more opportunities for concerned citizens to gather together and potentially forge networks, the better. That said, protesting for protesting’s sake can’t be the answer. What, therefore, was the value of Saturday’s march? Will the sum of our efforts help convince Congress to move beyond non-binding resolutions? Will our hope and determination endure? I remain eternally optimistic, and Saturday’s march didn’t do anything to change that. We both left Washington refreshed and recharged, focused on seeing our goals achieved. We also left inspired by the scores of patriotic Americans we met and the thousands more surrounding us. Saturday, as many said, wasn’t the ending of anything. It was merely the beginning. Or, more accurately, the next step in a growing movement that helped sweep Democrats into power with one overwhelming message - end this war. But as vital as the step itself is that we as progressives capitalize on every opportunity we’re presented with to study what we do and work to do it better. Because the better we do what we do, the more likely it is we accomplish what it is we were marching for in the first place. Discuss (

By DebbieDoRight

January 29, 2007 01:31 PM | Link to this

The President should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole.

True. The president is just another human being prone to errors, misjudgments and miscalculations. Humans are also prone to deceit, lies, and hypocrisy. By not questioning them, (presidents) puts more faith in a human being than anyone should feel comforable with.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 01:31 PM | Link to this

By Jay Bookman The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 01/29/07

In his State of the Union speech, President Bush once again warned of potentially dire consequences should the United States fail in Iraq.

Defeat, he told Congress, might spark “an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran and Sunni extremists aided by al-Qaida. … A contagion of violence could spill out across the country. And in time, the entire region could be drawn into the conflict. For America, this is a nightmare scenario.”

Grave as it seems, that assessment is exactly right. But it is also fair to ask: Why didn’t the administration consider the possibility of this “nightmare scenario” before it led us into war?

Why did it blithely ignore pre-war cautions from experts and analysts, some from within the U.S. government, that things would be far more difficult than claimed?

Why didn’t the president pay attention, for example, to the U.S. Army War College, which before the invasion issued a report that is now chilling in its foresight, warning that we would be stuck in Iraq for years, that U.S. forces would become a target for terrorists, that preserving the Iraqi army after the war was essential?

“Without an overwhelming effort to prepare for occupation,” the War College report warned, “the United States could find itself in a radically different world over the next few years, a world in which the threat of Saddam Hussein seems like a pale shadow of new problems of America’s own making.”

Which is exactly where we find ourselves today.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 01:32 PM | Link to this

He’s Your Dog, Charlie Brown Yep, that’s right, GOP. George W. Bush is your dog, and it’s time you put a leash on him and took him to the pound.

It’s not like he was a puppy when you got him. He was, as they say, a ‘mature animal’ when you decided to foist him on an unsuspecting nation.

All you had to do was talk to his previous owners, the State of Texas, and you would have found out what havoc he had wreaked in their home. He dirtied their environment, put his cronies in positions they weren’t up to, made sure the corporations had the run of the house when no one was looking – doesn’t any of this sound familiar? It should; it was all right there in his papers.

The damned dog couldn’t even find oil in Texas, no less a bone – ‘cause that would have required actual work, and we know how lazy your hound turned out to be.

Continued…

By hterrya

January 29, 2007 01:33 PM | Link to this

I check in on the comments on Mike Luckovich’s great cartoons from time to time. Today, as always, the Trolls are at their circle jerk once more.

While 79% of those responding to the poll LIKE the cartoon, the 21% Trolls who don’t, take up at least 50% of the comment space, doing their usual jerk routine: Dusty waving his white flag, Danish Muffin whoring for the NeoCons, luckodull being terminally dull, @@ being an @@$$, RW(the unoriginal) droning on as if he knows what he is talking about, and the rest of the Trolls, well, just being trolls.

Somebody call Troll Busters!

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 01:33 PM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - Convinced this is their moment, tens of thousands marched Saturday in an anti-war demonstration linking military families, ordinary people and an icon of the Vietnam protest movement in a spirited call to get out of Iraq.

ADVERTISEMENT

Celebrities, a half-dozen lawmakers and protesters from distant states rallied in the capital under a sunny sky, seizing an opportunity to press their cause with a Congress restive on the war and a country that has turned against the conflict.

Marching with them was Jane Fonda, in what she said was her first anti-war demonstration in 34 years.

“Silence is no longer an option,” Fonda said to cheers from the stage on the National Mall. The actress once derided as “Hanoi Jane” by conservatives for her stance on Vietnam said she had held back from activism so as not to be a distraction for the Iraq anti-war movement, but needed to speak out now.

The rally on the Mall unfolded peacefully, although about 300 protesters tried to rush the Capitol, running up the grassy lawn to the front of the building. Police on motorcycles tried to stop them, scuffling with some and barricading entrances.

Protesters chanted “Our Congress” as their numbers grew and police faced off against them. Demonstrators later joined the masses marching from the Mall, around Capitol Hill and back.

About 50 demonstrators blocked a street near the Capitol for about 30 minutes, but they were dispersed without arrests.

United for Peace and Justice, a coalition group sponsoring the protest, had hoped 100,000 would come. They claimed even more afterward, but police, who no longer give official estimates, said privately the crowd was smaller than 100,000.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 01:34 PM | Link to this

Dusty, you could not drag me to one of your “get-togethers” if you had an aircraft carrier. Ugh!

RW — I’m not rich enough to support Fair Tax. And yes, I have a fair idea as to what it is. I also have a fair idea of how I think it will work in practice.

I have no idea what the weed growing has to do with the board, but if you think that American soldiers don’t smoke the funky grass, you must have smoked a fair amount of it yourself.

By Goldie

January 29, 2007 01:43 PM | Link to this

With the ‘06 elections behind us, the state of GA has finally managed to secede from the U.S. And it may take another 50 years or so to actually come out of the 19th century — Oh, Scarlett! Oh, Tara! Who really needs that “vision-thing” in GA after all?

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 01:48 PM | Link to this

DDR,

So you’re a Neal Boortz fan! Here’s his website.

I don’t agree with everything he says, as I am generally more conservative (but not always) but I’m with him on the Fair Tax.

If you want to look at historical tables to see what percentage of GDP went to the Federal Deficit, Debt et cetera go here. Knock yourself out!

rushncap,

You probably are correct that the Fair Tax will not get passed, but that does not mean that it’s not the best proposal to revamp the tax system.

Getting rid of the I.R.S. would be the best thing we could do, and certainly privacy advocates should support it too.

The reason it is so difficult to pass is because entrenched government representatives like to be able to micro-manage and social-engineer “we the people” by doling out incentives or impediments to behavior.

RW,

So sad about Barbaro!

The Dmitry sounds like the submarine version of the Good Ship Lollipop. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that rushncap’s lab was located there, despite his claims of ignorance.

By Silly Rabbit

January 29, 2007 01:55 PM | Link to this

I must have scored a bullseye folks.

Sighted moron. Sank same.

By Keep an eye on...

January 29, 2007 02:02 PM | Link to this

Isakson and Chambliss both voted against the minimum wage.

By Ducks Rule

January 29, 2007 02:07 PM | Link to this

Barbaro is euthanized

Dogs gotta eat.

Huge python makes a meal of 11 guard dogs

Snakes too.

Duck shot by hunter cheats death again

But ducks rule.

By Frank Lee

January 29, 2007 02:11 PM | Link to this

LuckoDull @ 7:54, JFK was this country’s last great & conservative Democrat. A man of great vision & optimism. A president willing to stand on principle & stand firm in the face of our one true enemy of the time, communism.

Kruschev saw the U.S. as weak, but Kennedy proved him wrong.

The quote you referenced was not, IMO, his best. Allow me to offer his best.

“The American, by nature, is optimistic. He is experimental, an inventor and a builder who builds best when called upon to build greatly.” John F. Kennedy

Can a country accepting of defeat in the face of our present enemy build what’s best for this country? Can it continue to build greatly?

The answer is a resounding NO.

“If you don’t feel something strongly you’re not going to achieve.” George W. Bush.

To feel strongly that your mission will be successful can & will result in success given time & support.

If Americans see only defeat, as Democrats & a small number of Republicans do, then they have surrendered this country to our enemies in defeat.

It is the sad state of our union when we, as a people, cannot stand united behind our president & his determination to succeed in Iraq.

In support of a successful America, I remain.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 02:11 PM | Link to this

I would like to see this “Fair Tax” dealie implemented somewhere other than the world’s largest economy first. My guess is that it would fail, and dramatically. The present system is not perfect, but it at least works. I think gambling this much is ridiculous.

I’ll refrain from commenting on your latent xenophobia.

By And now, the rest of the story.

January 29, 2007 02:13 PM | Link to this

Suppose a bunch of rich people want to promote a national sales tax to replace the Federal income tax. How do they try to persuade the public to support such a plan? Simple: play with the arithmetic.

Earlier this month, the well-financed group Americans for Fair Taxation, based in Texas, kicked off a sales-tax campaign with a full-page advertisement in several large newspapers. It called for replacing all the main Federal taxes—personal and corporate income taxes, payroll taxes and the estate tax—with a 23 percent national retail sales tax.

According to the group, such a plan would raise exactly as much money as current laws do, while cutting taxes for just about everyone. The group’s plan has been implicitly endorsed by Representative Bill Archer, a Republican from Texas, the chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee and a longtime sales-tax fan and income-tax hater.

I was curious about how the group did its arithmetic, so I checked out its Web site—www.fairtax.org—and sent a note to the E-mail address to get further information about the group’s calculations.

According to the group’s figures, at 1995 levels a new sales tax would have to raise $1.36 trillion to replace all Federal income taxes, payroll taxes and estate and gift taxes. Under its plan, the group says, taxable spending would be $4.6 trillion (after accounting for rebates to partly protect lower-income families).So, $1.36 trillion divided by $4.6 trillion would be the required sales tax rate. Fine, except that $1.36 trillion divided by $4.6 trillion is not 23 percent. It’s about 30 percent.

It turns out that the group’s purported 23 percent tax rate is misleading and hypothetical. It came up with that number by dividing the sales tax by the cost of a purchase plus the tax. So if the tax on a $100 purchase is $30, the group prefers to call it a 23 percent “tax inclusive rate” ($30 divided by $130). Ever hear of computing a sales tax like that?

The fact that the group’s sales tax, even by its own figures, entails a 30 percent tax rate is only the beginning of the math problems. The group’s backup materials also assert that almost a third of its projected sales-tax revenue is supposed to come from taxes the Government will pay to itself. Build a road, pay yourself a tax. Buy some planes for the Air Force, pay yourself some more. And so on.

Unf

By Blackadder

January 29, 2007 02:21 PM | Link to this

The majority of Senate Republicans filibustering and delaying the passage of a new minimum wage law may be heartless, but they’re not dumb. They know that bumping the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour is enormously popular with the American people and they’re also aware that it passed by huge numbers in the House of Representatives, with 80 Republicans voting in favor of helping the working poor.

So why the stalling? Why put off the inevitable with over 100 nonsensical amendments, while already voting once against ending debate on a clean minimum wage bill?

Well, folks, it’s kind of like the Seinfeld episode, where George Costanza knows his girlfriend is about to break up with him so he just ducks her — breaks dates, pretends he’s not home, doesn’t answer the phone, reasoning that if he can stall her by not being available, she can’t break up with him.

Except in this case, the Republicans figure that if they can keep the Senate occupied indefinitely with an open-and-shut thing like a minimum wage increase, they can avoid the thing they fear most — having to vote on any of the myriad Iraq-war resolutions waiting in the wings.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 02:26 PM | Link to this

Thank you, Frank Lee. It’s nice to know that GW is the Peter Pan of politics. If you believe something hard enough, it will happen! Aren’t fairy tales wonderful?

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:31 PM | Link to this

This legislation provides for the implementation of the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations remaining after the enactment of the Intelligence Reform bill in 2004. The bill’s provisions include requiring major improvements in aviation security, border security, and infrastructure security; providing first responders the equipment and training they need; beefing up efforts to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction; and significantly expanding diplomatic, economic, educational, and other strategies designed to counter Islamic terrorism.

Facts >>

In 2004, the 9/11 Commission submitted 41 recommendations to the Administration and Congress on improving homeland security, preventing terrorists from acquiring WMD, and developing strategies for preventing the spread of Islamic terrorism. Many have only been partially implemented and others not at all.

In December 2005, in its final report card, the 9/11 Commissioners gave the Administration and Congress many poor grades on implementing the recommendations, including 5 F’s, 12 D’s, 9 C’s, and 2 Incompletes. A few months ago, they stated that the grades had not improved in 2006. For example, these grades include:

A “F” grade on providing a risk-based allocation of homeland security funding

A “F” grade on ensuring communications interoperability for first responders

A “D” grade on the screening of checked baggage and air cargo on passenger aircraft

A “D” grade on government information sharing

A “D” grade on preventing the proliferation of WMD and terrorism Implementing the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations is supported by 62 percent

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:32 PM | Link to this

This bill increases the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour over two years. Increasing the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour would bring a pay raise for up to 13 million Americans.

Facts >>

Raising the minimum wage would provide an additional $4,400/year for a family of three, equaling 15 months of groceries, or over two years of health care - helping them to keep up with rising costs.

Nearly 13 million people would likely benefit from the increase - 5.6 million directly and 7.4 million indirectly. This includes 7.7 million women, 3.4 million parents, and 4.7 million people of color.

It is wrong to have millions of Americans working full-time and year-round and still living in poverty. At $5.15 an hour, a full-time minimum wage worker brings home $10,712 a year -nearly $6,000 below the poverty level for a family of three.

A minimum wage increase is particularly important at a time when America’s families have seen their real income drop by almost $1,300 since 2000, while the costs of health insurance, gasoline, home heating, and attending college have increased by almost $5,000 annually. [Government Reform, 9/21/06]

The minimum wage has not increased in more than nine years - the longest period in the history of the law. During that time, Members of Congress have received a $31,600 pay raise. The real value of the minimum wage has plummeted to its lowest level in 51 years. [Economic Policy Institute, 6/06]

An average CEO earns more before lunchtime in one day than a minimum wage worker earns all year. [EPI, 6/2706]

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:35 PM | Link to this

The DeGette-Castle stem cell research bill increases the number of lines of stem cells that are eligible to be used in federally-funded research. The bill authorizes Health and Human Services (HHS) to support research involving embryonic stem cells meeting certain criteria, regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from an embryo. Current policy allows federal funds to be used for research only on those stem cell lines that existed when President Bush issued an executive order on August 9, 2001. The bill only authorizes the use of stem cell lines generated from embryos that would otherwise be discarded by fertility clinics. The bill includes stronger ethical guidelines than the President’s current policy.

Facts >>

The bill only authorizes the use of stem cell lines generated from embryos that would otherwise be discarded by fertility clinics. The bill has strict ethical guidelines, including stipulating that embryos can be used only if the donors give their written consent and receive no money or other inducement in exchange for the embryos.

Embryonic stem cell research has the potential to unlock the doors to treatments and cures to numerous diseases, including diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s, ALS, multiple sclerosis, and cancer.

Expanding embryonic stem cell research is supported by 72 percent of Americans. [Opinion Research Corporation]

Embryonic stem cell research is supported by more than 200 organizations, including the American Medical Association, AARP, Association of American Medical Colleges, Parkinson’s Action Network, American Diabetes Association, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, and Paralyzed Veterans of America.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:36 PM | Link to this

This bill repeals the current provision that prohibit the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) from negotiating with drug companies for lower prices for those enrolled in Medicare prescription drug plans and instead requires the Secretary to conduct such negotiations. The bill also requires the HHS Secretary to submit to the relevant congressional committees a report on the negotiations conducted by the Secretary, not later than June 1, 2007, and every six months thereafter. Under the bill, the Secretary has discretion on how to best implement the negotiating authority and achieve the greatest discounts.

Facts >>

This bill provides the HHS Secretary complete discretion in how to implement his negotiating authority. The Secretary’s options are many and HHS has a wealth of expertise, which it successfully used in 2001 to obtain lower prices for Cipro, the prescription drug used in response to the anthrax attacks.

Giving HHS negotiating authority is supported by 92 percent of Americans. [Newsweek poll, 11/06] It is also supported by many organizations, including the AARP, Consumers Union, and the AFL-CIO.

The current Medicare Rx drug law has failed to slow the rapid growth in drug prices; the prices charged by Medicare drug plans are rising at more than twice the rate of overall inflation. A Families USA study shows that, over a 6-month period, the median drug price increase among Medicare drug plans for the top 20 drugs prescribed for seniors was 3.7 percent - which translates into a 7.4 percent increase over a year, more than twice the rate of overall inflation. As the study concludes, “The Medicare drug plans are not containing drug price inflation.”

The Medicare Rx drug program has resulted in a windfall for big drug companies - with drug companies now reporting record profits and seniors paying higher drug prices. In October, Pfizer, the world’s biggest drug company, reported that its third-quarter earnings had more than doubled from a year earlier. Similarly, Eli Lilly, Novartis and Wyeth also reported significantly higher profits.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:37 PM | Link to this

This bill makes college more accessible and affordable by cutting the interest rates on subsidized student loans in half – from the current 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent. This significantly cuts the student debt burden of about 5 million students.

Facts >>

Cutting student loan interest rates is supported by 88 percent of the American public - with a majority of Republicans, Independents, and Democrats all in support. [Newsweek poll, 11/06]

The costs of attending college continue to skyrocket - putting college out-of-reach for more and more students. Tuition and fees at public universities have increased by 41 percent after inflation since the 2000-2001 school year and tuition and fees at private universities have jumped by 17 percent after inflation.

In addition to tuition and fees rising, interest rates on student loans have risen. Over the last five years, the interest rates on student loans have jumped by almost 2 percentage points - further increasing the cost of college. More and more students are staggering under the load of student debt - with the typical student borrower now graduating from college with $17,500 in debt.

According to studies from the Department of Education, financial barriers will prevent 4.4 million high school graduates from attending a four-year public college over the next decade, and prevent another two million high school graduates from attending any college at all.

More than ever, the health of our economy rests on having a highly-skilled and well-educated workforce. College access is the key to our remaining strong in the face of an increasingly competitive global economy. Without changes, by the year 2020, the United States is projected to face a shortage of up to 12 million college-educated workers, directly threatening America’s economic strength.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:38 PM | Link to this

This bill invests in clean, renewable energy and energy efficiency by repealing billions in subsidies given to big oil companies that are raking in record profits. Specifically, the measure ensures oil companies that were awarded the 1998 and 1999 leases for drilling paid their fair share in royalties. It also closes loopholes and ends giveaways in the tax code for Big Oil. Finally, the bill creates a Strategic Renewable Energy Reserve to invest in clean, renewable energy resources, promoting new emerging technologies, developing greater efficiency and improving energy conservation.

Facts >>

Over the last several years, profits and subsidies for Big Oil have climbed, as has our dependence on foreign oil. In 2006, the big five oil companies made $97 billion - nearly five times their profits in 2002. Gas prices at the pump also topped $3 per gallon.

The U.S. now has a record dependence on foreign oil, which has climbed to 65 percent.

The U.S. is sending about $800 million per day to the Middle East and other oil producing countries.

Reducing our dependence on foreign oil is critical to bolstering our national security and creating good-paying new jobs. American farms abound with crops that can be used to fuel our cars and trucks - from corn to soybeans to switchgrass. In 2005, the ethanol industry supported the creation of more than 150,000 jobs in all sectors of the U.S. economy, boosting U.S. household income by $5.7 billion. [Report for the Renewable Fuels Association]

The President’s budget funds renewable energy and energy efficiency at below the 2001 level, in real terms, and provides nearly 50 percent less for research on renewable energy than was promised in the energy law.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:39 PM | Link to this

Washington, D.C. – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi today released the following statement on President Bush’s State of the Union Address:

“Congress has demonstrated in the last three weeks that great things happen for the American people when we work together. In his sixth State of the Union Address, President Bush once again talked about many of the issues facing our country. It is long past time to stop talking about our problems and start working to solve them. The Congress is delivering results, and doing it in a new way - by reaching across the aisle and putting the American people first. Tonight, we welcomed President Bush’s overtures of bipartisanship and we hope to begin working with him to move our country in a new direction.

“Energy independence is a national security issue and an economic security issue. President Bush’s goals for energy independence are commendable, but we now must get straight to work on a real national energy policy. In Congress, we have already begun work in earnest on renewable fuels, on global warming, and on shifting energy tax incentives away from Big Oil. We ask the President to join us to take real steps forward.

“Unfortunately, tonight the President demonstrated he has not listened to Americans’ single greatest concern: the war in Iraq. The overwhelming majority of Americans, military leaders, and a bipartisan coalition in Congress oppose the President’s plan to escalate the war. Democrats, Republicans, and the bipartisan Iraq Study Group have offered the President a plan to end our open-ended commitment to Iraq, transition the U.S. mission, and begin the phased redeployment of American troops. While the President continues to ignore the will of the country, Congress will not ignore this President’s failed policy. His plan will receive an up-or-down vote in both the House and the Senate, and we will continue to hold him accountable for changing course in Iraq.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:41 PM | Link to this

Monday, January 22, 2007

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade:

“Today, we observe the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that affirmed a woman’s right to make her own reproductive health care decisions.

“Roe v. Wade is based on a woman’s fundamental right to privacy, a value that all Americans cherish. It established that decisions about whether to have a child do not and should not rest with the government. A woman – in consultation with her family, her physician, and her faith – is best qualified to make that decision.

“The 110th Congress signals an end to 12 years of destructive debate putting politics above science and restricting women’s rights afforded by the Constitution. In this new Congress, we will work together in a bipartisan way to reduce the number of abortions by preventing unintended pregnancies through comprehensive sexuality education and access to family planning in the U.S. and abroad.

“As I have throughout my time in Congress, I will continue to work to ensure a woman’s right to choose. We must preserve the right to privacy while promoting a comprehensive approach to reproductive health care, including planning for healthy families.”

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:42 PM | Link to this

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on H.R. 5, the College Student Relief Act of 2007, which cuts the interest rates on student loans and passed on the House floor by a vote of 356 to 71, with all Democrats and 124 Republicans voting for the bill:

“Today’s bipartisan vote to cut the interest rate in half on federally subsidized student loans over the next five years will help make a college education more affordable and more accessible for our next generation of leaders and innovators. At a time when college tuition continues to skyrocket, this crucial legislation will help remove some of the barriers to a higher education.

“A college education is the best investment our nation’s young people can make in themselves, and the best investment our nation can make in its future. Democrats will continue to work to ensure that every young person that is determined to earn a higher education is able to do so. Our young people should be driven by their dreams, not weighed down by debt.”

Sign up for email updates to learn more.

More Press Releases and Statements

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:43 PM | Link to this

Friday, January 12, 2007

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today in recognition of Martin Luther King Day, which is observed on Monday, January 15th:

“With his total intolerance of intolerance, Martin Luther King brought us closer to the ideal of equality that is America’s heritage and hope. Today our nation is facing different tests of our commitment to the values that make our nation great. But Dr. King’s powerful message of justice rings equally true today. Now we must recommit to finishing his work.

“On the third Monday of January, we honor the work of Dr. King – not just in word, but in deed. Martin Luther King Day is not a holiday, but rather a day of service, in which we are called to carry the work of Dr. King forward with labor of our own.

“More than 40 years ago, Martin Luther King came to Washington to say, ‘We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off….Now is the time to make justice a reality for all God’s children.’ It is not enough to keep Dr. King’s spirit alive in eulogy. It is not enough to reflect on his work and ideals. We must make them our own, with the fierce urgency of now.”

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:43 PM | Link to this

Pelosi: ‘Stem Cell Research Will Give Hope to Millions of Americans who Suffer from Devastating Illnesses’ Thursday, January 11, 2007

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on H.R. 3, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which passed on the floor with bipartisan support by a vote of 253-174:

“Today, by passing legislation to expand stem cell research, the House gave voice to the hopes of more than 100 million Americans and their families.

“With the great potential of embryonic stem cell research, science has the power to answer the prayers of America’s families. We must unlock the promise for stem cell therapies to alleviate human suffering and to cure diseases, including diabetes, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, and cancer.

“The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 will expand federal funding for enormously promising embryonic stem cell research, using stem cell lines generated from embryos that would have otherwise been discarded by fertility clinics. Unlike President Bush’s current policy, this legislation includes strong ethical guidelines for conducting stem cell research.

“With today’s strong bipartisan vote, we now challenge President Bush to join members from both sides of the aisle in supporting the hope of stem cell research. Democrats and Republicans have joined together today to urge the President to sign this vital legislation into law.”

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:45 PM | Link to this

Pelosi Calls for a New America, Built on the Values that Made Our Country Great Thursday, January 4, 2007

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. - Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi will speak this afternoon during the opening session of the 110th Congress immediately following her election as Speaker of the House of Representatives. Below are her remarks as prepared:

“Thank you, Leader Boehner.

“I accept this gavel in the spirit of partnership, not partisanship, and look forward to working with you on behalf of the American people.

“In this House, we may belong to different parties, but we serve one country. We stand united in our pride and prayers for our men and women in the armed forces. They are working together to protect America, and we, in this House, must also work together to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.

“In this hour, we pray for the character, courage, and civility of a former Member of this House - President Ford. He healed the country when it needed healing. This is another time, another war, and another trial of our American will, imagination, and spirit. Let us honor his memory, not just in eulogy, but in dialogue and trust across the aisle. Let us express our condolences and appreciation to Mrs. Ford and the entire Ford family for their decades of service to our country.

“With today’s convening of the 110th Congress, we begin anew. I congratulate all Members of Congress on their election, especially our new Members. The genius of our Founders is that every two years, new Members bring to this House their spirit of renewal and hope for the American people. This Congress is reinvigorated by your optimism, your idealism, and your commitment to our country. Let us acknowledge your families, whose support has made your leadership possible.

“Each of us brings to this new Congress our shared values, our commitment to the Constitution, and our personal experience.

“My path to the Speakership began in Baltimore where my father was Mayor. I was raised in a large family that was devoutly Catholic, deeply patriotic, proud of our Italian American heritage, and staunchly Democratic. My parents taught us that public service was a noble calling, and that we had a responsibility to help those in need. My parents worked on the side of the angels and now they are with them.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 02:47 PM | Link to this

Foreskin, please. Don’t turn into li’l andy. If there is something you want to post, give us a link. Please don’t spam the board with an essay broken up into allowable chunks. If we choose to read the essay, we will, otherwise this is annoying to those who don’t want to do that.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:47 PM | Link to this

Pelosi Statement on the State Child Health Insurance Program Saturday, December 9, 2006

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi released the following statement this morning on legislation to ensure funding for the State Child Health Insurance Program, which passed by unanimous consent:

“As Members of Congress, it is our duty to make every decision with America’s children in mind, conscious of our responsibility to them. That is why it was vital that this Congress fulfilled that responsibility tonight by ensuring that the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) receives the funding necessary to avoid critical shortfalls.

“At a time when more than 8 million children in America are without health insurance and 17 states are facing SCHIP funding shortfalls – 600,000 low-income children would be at risk of losing health insurance coverage without this legislation.

“While we can take some measure of comfort that a deal has been reached, the results are less than ideal. New additional funds should have been provided. This stopgap measure will ensure that these children do not lose their health insurance, but is a far cry from our responsibility of providing for our nation’s children.

“In the next Congress, Democrats will take America in a New Direction, making health care for our children a real priority.”

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:51 PM | Link to this

Pelosi Statement on Ryan White Care Act Saturday, December 9, 2006

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi released the following statement this morning on H.R. 6143, the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Modernization Act of 2006, which passed by unanimous consent:

“For years, the Ryan White CARE Act has given hope to those fighting HIV and AIDS. The help it provides has been instrumental in our battle against HIV and AIDS. And with tonight’s crucial vote, the Ryan White CARE Act will continue to improve the quality and availability of health care services for the people living with HIV and AIDS.

“When the reauthorization of the Ryan White CARE Act was passed by the House earlier this year, I was saddened to vote against it because when it came to meeting the needs of people living with AIDS, it fell far short. Tonight, we righted that wrong, sending a vastly improved bill to the President that reaffirms our will to fight HIV and AIDS.

“Our work is not yet done. Funding has not kept pace with the number of people with AIDS or with inflation, dropping 35 percent per case since 2001. It is long past time we provide additional funding, and next year, under a Democratic Congress, we will reverse that decline.”

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:52 PM | Link to this

Pelosi Statement on Iraq Study Group Report Wednesday, December 6, 2006

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi released the following statement this morning on the report issued today by the Iraq Study Group:

“The bipartisan Iraq Study Group has concluded that the President’s Iraq policy has failed and must be changed. As the November elections clearly demonstrated, that is an assessment shared by the American people.

“Months ago, House and Senate Democratic leaders suggested to the President that he implement one of the Study Group’s chief recommendations – to change the primary mission of U.S. troops in Iraq from combat to training and support, which would enable the redeployment of U.S. forces to begin. Now that the Study Group has endorsed this proposal, I hope that the President will recognize that he must take our policy in Iraq in a new direction.

“If the President is serious about the need for change in Iraq, he will find Democrats ready to work with him in a bipartisan fashion to find a way to end the war as quickly as possible. We are committed to ensuring that the ideas of the Iraq Study Group, as well as the ideas of other thoughtful people inside and outside of government, are given full consideration in that process.”

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 02:53 PM | Link to this

Pelosi: Our Coasts Need Lasting Protection from Oil and Gas Drilling Monday, December 4, 2006

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on news media reports that President Bush is considering lifting the presidential moratorium protecting Alaska’s Bristol Bay from oil and gas drilling:

“The Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 showed the world the devastation and destruction that oil spills could have on Alaska’s fragile waters. Under intense pressure from an angry public, Congress did the right thing by placing Alaska’s Bristol Bay under a moratorium; President Clinton later also signed an executive moratorium. Oil spills would devastate Bristol Bay’s prolific fishing industry, Native American communities, tourism industry, abundant marine life, and diverse and endangered wildlife.

“The American people paid $95 million to buy back leases from oil companies to ensure that Bristol Bay would be forever protected from devastating oil spills. Yet this week, with the stroke of a pen, President George W. Bush is expected to reverse progress and turn back the clock by lifting the presidential moratorium. Allowing oil drilling to go forward in Bristol Bay puts our precious environment at risk. Allowing new oil company leasing of these lands is an insult to all taxpayers who have helped protect them.

“Our domestic oil supplies are valuable but limited. We should not sacrifice our marine ecosystems, robust tourist economies, and fishing communities for the sake of extracting every last drop of oil from American soil.

“Our fragile coasts, from Alaska to California to Florida, require greater protection than a mere presidential moratorium that can be easily lifted. Lasting protection under the law is essential. So is a comprehensive plan that builds our economy around clean, homegrown, renewable energy sources and exciting new technologies.

“While the Bush Administration dances to the oil companies’ tune, Democrats intend to achieve energy independence within 10 years.”

By Goldie

January 29, 2007 03:21 PM | Link to this

{{“If you don’t feel something strongly you’re not going to achieve.” George W. Bush.}}

So Dubya must’ve felt “strongly” that his dad would bail him out of his failed businesses in Texas… and America is supposed to believe in his fairy-tale thinking after 4 years of death and destruction in Iraq, and still no reliable sources for electricity and gasoline for those Iraqi citizens? Are the Repugnants able to feel “strongly” and imagine what America would be like if we had to endure an occupation by another country (say, China) for 4 years and not have electricity or gasoline available on a daily basis?

I suggest that 32% of America feels strongly about fairy tales, or else we would have brought the American troops home long before now.

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 03:21 PM | Link to this

PoFo the MoFo,

Here is Nancy Pelosi’s website.

Please devour it to your heart’s desire, and Eff off post haste like a good little jackass.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 03:22 PM | Link to this

RE:
Sorry I just dropped off Thurs after your question. I had guests coming and had to get the beef bourguignon going. Re: the Scooter/Plame thing, you asked:

“Paul, just to sum up, is there any doubt in your mind that the whitehouse tried to put out the assumption that it was not invloved in the plame leak in any way when in fact it was”

Sure, I think that’s fair. But as near as I can tell from listening to lots of sources, it probably went down something like:

Administration’s making a case against Iran. Getting lots of info. Joe Wilson goes public with his accusations.

People in Admin say “huh? Who is this guy? And just how and why was he picked for this mission?” Finds out wife got ball rolling. Timing is coincidental with Novak, others investigating. In an effort to question his credibility they confirm “yeah, he went to Niger, his report was one of many, was an okay report, hey, his wife got him on his way, for Pete’s sake, and he’s an Admin opponent.”

Novak publishes his column, says Plame is at CIA. Wilson goes goes to a liberal blogger and says “My wife was a covert agent and people could die.” That got the ball rolling. People in Administration said “What?!!? Oh SH*T! Did I step in it? Why didn’t we know she was covert?!!? Quick - who talked to Novak?” Limitation of liability begins. Virtually no one questions Wilson.

That’s how I see it now. Given new information, of course I’ll change my mind, if warranted.

BTW - assume Wilson is a truthful guy with no ax to grind, as many here do. If you cite his statements as knowledgeable (of course he knew his wife’s status), then there’s a slight problem. There was this interview with Wolfe Blitzer on CNN (that’s an okay source, right?):

CNN – Wolf Blitzer Aired July 14, 2005 - 17:00 ET

BLITZER: But the other argument that’s been made against you is that you’ve sought to capitalize on this extravaganza, having that photo shoot with your wife, who was a clandestine officer of the CIA, and that you’ve tried to enrich yourself writing this book and all of that.

What do you make of those accusations, which are serious accusations, as you know, that have been leveled against you?

WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her

By Dusty

January 29, 2007 03:30 PM | Link to this

Is this now the Political Foreskin Blog?

Ah but can PoFo draw little repetitious cartoons?

By DebbieDoRight

January 29, 2007 03:34 PM | Link to this

Danish: That was soooo naughty!!!

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 03:39 PM | Link to this

Paul — I’m sure Wilson has an ax to grind. But still, if your version of the events is correct (and it very well may be), the Administration reprisal attack was at the very least careless, if not malicious in the exposure of Plame as a Spook. Wilson told the truth (no yellowcake story to speak of, despite what El Busho said), and they lashed back out, in the process outing his wife. Even if that was not meant to be this harmful, this is still a egregious abuse of power on the part of the Administration.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 03:40 PM | Link to this

Goldie

I apologize for the “ideologue” crack last week. That’s not up to me to say. You may be more tendentious in many areas discussed here than I am and that’s okay.

I recalled I had met a no-kidding ideologue - I was at a national meeting, formal dinner time, one of the wives seated at our table introduced herself as one of the Massachusetts state “directors” for the Kerry campaign. When she heard I live in a southern state she said “Oh, I suppose you’re a Bush supporter.” I said no, I said I live in ——. I haven’t made up my mind who has my vote and frankly don’t know that much about Kerry’s views on a variety of issues. You should be qualified. Would you please inform me?

She began an attack on everything Bush. I said “wait - if I go to a Mercedes dealership and say I’m deciding between Mercedes and BMW and ask them to point out Mercedes’ finer points, and all they do is demean BMW, I’ll be more inclined to buy a BMW. Care to start over?” She did - same result. I found tht pretty amazing. But a couple years later I saw her at a similar meeting. She asked “are you happy with your boy Bush?” I told her he wasn’t “my boy” and frankly, she knew nothing of whom I supported or why. She said “but you didn’t agree with what I was saying about him two years ago.”

Now, that is what I would call an ideologue.

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 03:41 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Here is an excerpt from the timeline of events.

YOU may want to pay careful attention to the Sept. 28 entry where the ——CIA Director, George Tenet, requests an investigation—— into the exposure of one of his covert agents.

Sept. 14, 2003: Vice President Cheney, on NBC’s Meet the Press, is asked if he had been briefed on Wilson’s findings when Wilson returned from Niger. Cheney responds: “No. I don’t know Joe Wilson. I’ve never met Joe Wilson.” Cheney adds moments later, “I don’t know who sent Joe Wilson. He never submitted a report that I ever saw when he came back.

Sept. 16, 2003: McClellan calls “totally ridiculous” the allegation that presidential adviser Karl Rove was the source of the leak.

Sept. 28, 2003: CIA Director George J. Tenet calls on the Justice Department to investigate the leak.

Sept. 29, 2003: McClellan reiterates his earlier defense of Rove, adding that he had spoken to Rove about the leak.

Sept. 30, 2003: The Justice Department launches a full criminal investigation into the leaking of Plame’s name. President Bush, speaking to reporters in Chicago, says, “If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of…”

Kind of curious, with the testimony we’ve seen in the past week, that Bush STILL apparently hasn’t been able find out who in the Whitehouse was involved.

One would think that if he were sincere, being the President, Bush would, in short order, be able to assemble the appropriate people, say, ‘Okay, let’s hear it,’ and gotten right to the truth.

Unless he was lying…

By Midori

January 29, 2007 03:44 PM | Link to this

Valerie Plame did not send Ambassador Wilson to Niger.

Her superiors wanted someone with the proper expertise, and she suggested her husband, as he did have the proper expertise.

to keep repeating that his wife sent him to Niger is nothing more than a bald faced lie put out by Dick Cheney’s ghouls, and repeated ad naseum by the ignorant and fact-challenged.

By Dusty

January 29, 2007 03:45 PM | Link to this

Goldie,

You can stop pumping out the liberal propaganda now. I read that Mr. Kahn, head of the propaganda department of the Georgia Democratic Party has left his job.

Sounds like the firebrand left and you will have to do your own liberal complaining. It’s going to be tough without guidelines. Maybe you or Mrs. Godzilla could volunteer. You have had lots of experience in compliance.

By RE

January 29, 2007 03:45 PM | Link to this

Next line:

BLITZER: But she hadn’t been a clandestine officer for some time before that?

WILSON: That’s not anything that I can talk about. And, indeed, I’ll go back to what I said earlier, the CIA believed that a possible crime had been committed, and that’s why they referred it to the Justice Department.

She was not a clandestine officer at the time that that article in “Vanity Fair” appeared. And I have every right to have the American public know who I am and not to have myself defined by those who would write the sorts of things that are coming out, being spewed out of the mouths of the RNC…

Where did the Wilson contacting a liberal blogger come from.

A few things, the CIA opened the investigation, not Wilson or Plame.

No matter what her status is or may have been, Rove, Cheney, Libby, Flisher and others at the very top level of the whitehouse knew about the leak and may have initiated it, when the story broke, the whitehouse denied knowledge.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 03:46 PM | Link to this

rushncap

Agree to a point. Wilson had an axe. Politicos in Administration had an axe. Many in that cloistered bubble call it “politics.” They got caught. I don’t mean to be flippant - but this is a good example of political infighting. Wilson did it better -

And thanks recognizing my post was truncated - the last line was

WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 03:51 PM | Link to this

I find this entry interesting as well, particularly in light of testimony about Cheney’s efforts to manipulate the press:

July 22, 2003: At a White House news briefing, McClellan, when asked about the administration leaking Plame’s name, states: “That is not the way this president or this White House operates.”

Unfortunately, the facts have ‘exposed’ (pardon the pun) that THIS IS EXACTLY how this White House operates.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 03:57 PM | Link to this

Paul - how do you “blow an identity” of someone who is not covert? You can’t “blow my identity” as a student because it’s not a secret. Obviously there was something there to blow, am I wrong? So obviously it was not known that Plame is a Spook. And, obviously, you could not just look up the fact that she was a spook, else what’s the use of Novak?

By Paul

January 29, 2007 04:04 PM | Link to this

Lord Help Us

He may. I see Jesus was here this morning. This is what, the Third Coming?

Yeah, I’ve seen that. Many had Rove convicted - now we know that’s not quite correct. All sorts of “this is why Justice is investigation and this is what CIA” comments are about - and in this case, wording is important, as in this arena, words have specific meaning. One of the better treatments is in this MSNBC story where she’s a “CIA officer.” Fair enough. She was working on a classified program. That is where, I think many make the assumption “works on clasified programs means she’s a covert agent.” As I’ve said, she may have been, but I’ve not seen anything definitive and given her status, talking about her publicly may not have been prosecutable.

As I’ve said, referring the case to Justice was a wise move. Ironic, though, if the worst case was true (administration and/or others revealed classified information to an unauthorized source, including personnel identities and methods, procedures and program details) and the Administration had gone after Novak, many here would be defending Novak and castigating the Administration for trying to muzzle the press and silence critics.

And still Armitage skates.

Midori - you once got a bit upset when I wrote something you said about one of my posts wasn’t quite accurate. Something to the effect I parse words or something. Here we go again. I never said Plame sent Wilson to Niger. I said she “got the ball rolling.” She suggested him for his contacts and expertise (just as you wrote). Plus he was already heading in that direction so CIA could respond to the Office of the Vice President’s request.

Unless you were referring to someone else -

By Goldie

January 29, 2007 04:05 PM | Link to this

Dusty-brain is now the propaganda expert — sure makes sense to me, after reading some of the lamest propaganda posted by her day after day. No fact-checking involved— just cranking out the right-wing fairy tale pablum and kissing the @ss of our dictator-president is all that’s required of her!

By Dusty

January 29, 2007 04:07 PM | Link to this

Well, Paul,

Looks like you will have to go over the whole nine plamin’ yards again. Good luck.

I am going to build a fire. In the fireplace that is. Getting really chilly in these parts…… Did you know chef Prudhomme or whatever his name was?

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:09 PM | Link to this

REID CONTINUES EFFORTS TO HELP NEVADA VETERANS

Monday, January 29, 2007

Washington, DC— This week U.S. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada will introduce a new bill, the Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2007, which would allow veterans eligible for both disability compensation and retirement pay to collect both concurrently. “I am thankful to the nation’s veterans – for their great sacrifices and all that they do for our country,” said Reid. “I’ve been working for veterans across Nevada and this great nation for seven years to ensure their commitment to the country is not forgotten. More importantly I’m working on this issue to take care of veterans – to make certain they receive the benefits they rightfully deserve and so desperately need.”

Reid has backed numerous veteran initiatives, including the Combat-Related Special Compensation Act, an increase in funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs and improved veterans’ health care across Nevada.

Reid is the champion in the fight for full concurrent receipt. Year after year, members of Congress revisit the issue of injustice in compensation for veterans—the ban on concurrent receipt. Disabled veterans face the obstacle of forfeiting retirement pay dollar-for-dollar if they receive disability compensation. Reid is committed to securing a fair policy to provide veterans with the entirety of their earned compensation.

Last session Reid introduced legislation (S.558) which would provide concurrent receipt to military retirees, with 20 or more years of service, who are rated less than 50 percent. It would also eliminate the 10-year phase-in period for veterans who draw their disability and retirement pay.

Approximately 250,000 veterans live in Nevada making it home to the third largest veterans’ population in the nation.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:10 PM | Link to this

REID, CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS CALL FOR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IN PRESIDENT’S BUDGET

Friday, January 26, 2007

Washington, DC—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada joined with other congressional leaders today in sending the following letter to President Bush, urging him to change course from his reckless fiscal policies of the past and adopt new fiscally responsible policies in his fiscal year 2008 Budget. While budgets from the past six years have added $3 trillion dollars to the federal debt, the new Democratic Congress looks forward to working with the President in a bipartisan fashion to change course and return to fiscal responsibility. In the letter signed by Reid, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, and House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt set forth four basic principles, compliance with which would demonstrate the President’s commitment to fiscal responsibility and his willingness to work in a constructive manner with Congress:

As the leaders write: “In order to reverse our nation’s fiscal course, both parties must understand that difficult choices and shared sacrifices must be made. Your upcoming budget submission provides an important marker for demonstrating a shared commitment to fiscal responsibility.”

The full text of the letter is below.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:11 PM | Link to this

The President The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing to express our strong interest in working cooperatively with you to address our nation’s fiscal challenges.

In our view, we now have an important opportunity to revisit current budget policies that have dramatically increased the debt. We are prepared to work with you to make the tough choices needed to address our fiscal challenges. As you know, over the past six years, current budget policies have led to a $3 trillion increase in the federal debt. With the first baby boomers set to retire next year, new and substantial pressures will be placed on the Federal budget. It is clear we need to change course.

History demonstrates that your leadership is absolutely critical if we are to achieve significant deficit reduction. Because you are required to prepare and submit a budget to Congress each year, your budget provides an important opportunity to demonstrate your willingness to make the difficult choices needed to tackle our fiscal challenges. The presidency also gives you a unique capacity to communicate with the public, and persuade Americans of the need for these difficult choices. We feel strongly that the best prospects for success rest with strong and active presidential leadership, coupled with strong bipartisan congressional support.

In order to reverse our nation’s fiscal course, both parties must understand that difficult choices and shared sacrifices must be made. Your upcoming budget submission provides an important marker for demonstrating a shared commitment to fiscal responsibility. We urge you to submit a budget that is consistent with the following principles:

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:12 PM | Link to this

) The budget should account realistically for projected Federal costs. In particular, we urge you to responsibly account in the Administration’s budget for predictable costs that have been omitted in past budgets, such as costs for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and for addressing the alternative minimum tax (AMT). Your budget will set the framework for how these items are presented in this year’s budget process.

2) The budget should realistically project short- and long-term deficits. A clear perception exists that for years, Administration budgets have both overstated current year budget projections – to allow claims of “progress” later in the year – and understated long-term deficits, to avoid the need for hard choices.

3) The budget should provide detail throughout the entire budget period. In the past, Administration budgets have detailed discretionary spending levels for one year, but then merely assumed large savings in subsequent years, without detailing the specific spending cuts required to achieve those savings over the entire budget period. We urge you to put forward a budget this year that avoids using this type of budget gimmick and that is as explicit as possible about the hard choices required to meet your budget goals.

4) The budget should be based on fiscal discipline that is sustained over the long-term . It is important that the Congress and the American public fully understand both the short and long-term consequences and costs of the Administration’s proposed budget policies. As such, we urge you to submit a budget that fully captures the costs of your policy proposals.

By Midori

January 29, 2007 04:12 PM | Link to this

What’s significant is the detail that Fleischer provided. He said that Libby told him not just that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA, but that she worked at the counter-proliferations division. That was a particular detail that is significant to people who know about the CIA. The counter-proliferations division is in the Director of Operations. That’s the secret arm of the CIA. It’s the most sensitive arm of the CIA. Something that Libby and his boss, Vice President Dick Cheney, very well knew. They knew the CIA like the back of their hands.“>http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/MichaelIsikoffcommentsonAriFleischer0129.html)

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:15 PM | Link to this

Clearly, Democrats and Republicans will disagree about particular priorities, and we will need to negotiate our differences in deciding how to allocate scarce resources. But, as a first step, we all should be able to agree on these basic principles of fiscal responsibility.

Your upcoming budget provides both the Congress and the Administration with an important opportunity to begin a dialogue on budget priorities and fiscal discipline that is open and transparent. We hope you will seize this opportunity, and ensure that your budget complies with these basic principles. In our view, this would represent an important first step toward a much-needed bipartisan agreement to address our nation’s fiscal challenges.

Thank you for your consideration of our views.

Sincerely,

Harry Reid Senate Majority Leader

Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the House of Representatives

Kent Conrad Chairman, Senate Budget Committee

John Spratt Chairman, House Budget Committee

By getalife

January 29, 2007 04:16 PM | Link to this

Wingnuts,

“So how long have you suffered from ACS? Ann Coulter Syndrome; wherein the afflicted gain strength through the hatred of others.”

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:17 PM | Link to this

Press Release of Senator Reid REID MEETS WITH MAYORS GIBSON AND GOODMAN

Discussion addressed issues concerning Henderson and Las Vegas

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Las Vegas, NV- U.S. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada recently met with the mayors of Nevada’s three largest cities, Reno Mayor Bob Cashell, Henderson Mayor James B. Gibson, and Las Vegas Mayor Oscar B. Goodman. While meeting with Reid, the mayors discussed transportation, homeland security, growth and ways the federal and local governments can work together on behalf of Nevada. In their meeting, both Henderson City Mayor James B. Gibson and Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman shared with Reid their firsthand knowledge of the need for support from the federal government to address critical issues including growth and funding for first responders.

“I’m pleased I was able to meet with Mayors Gibson and Goodman,” said Reid. “We discussed many ways we can to work together to improve Southern Nevada. I will continue working at the federal level to help Nevada’s local governments create more affordable housing, improve our transportation systems, and increase Nevada’s homeland security.”

The mayors were in the nation’s Capital for the 75th Winter Meeting of The United States Conference of Mayors.

By Goldie

January 29, 2007 04:18 PM | Link to this

Paul— I have no idea what you’re going on about today re: “ideologues”. And I’m not gonna bore you with all of the stupid conversations I’ve had with some heel-clicking rightwing loonies in my past, either. You seem to be going through some kind of identity crisis these days — small wonder.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:18 PM | Link to this

Press Release of Senator Reid REID WORKS ON BIPARTISAN LEVEL TO STRENGTHEN COURTHOUSE SECURITY IN NEVADA

Legislation will send federal funds to provide additional security to protect judges against threats of violence

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Washington, D.C. – Determined to pass legislation to protect judges, U.S. Senator Harry Reid today joined with key Senators and House Members to support a bipartisan, bicameral bill that would strengthen and expand protections for judges and their families. During the last Congress, Reid took the lead on initiating the legislation and moving the process forward in the wake of a sniper style Courthouse shooting in Reno which injured Nevada District Court Judge Chuck Weller.

“I’m proud that, on a bipartisan basis, work is progressing to make our courthouses safer,” said Senator Reid. “The urgent need for this legislation is especially important to the people of Nevada where someone attempted to take the life of Judge Weller of Reno just this past summer. I am committed to fast tracking this legislation - quickly passing this bill in the Senate and working with the House in order to get it to the President to become law.”

Key provisions of the bill include:

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:19 PM | Link to this

New criminal penalties for the misuse of restricted personal information to threaten to seriously harm judges, their families or other individuals performing official duties;

Enhancing penalties for tampering with or retaliating against witnesses New resources for state courts to improve security for state and local courts; Provisions extending life insurance benefits to bankruptcy, magistrate and territorial judges. Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Senator Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the panel’s ranking member, teamed up with Reid, Senate Majority Whip, Dick Durbin, D-Ill. as well as Senators Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Susan Collins, R-Maine, to introduce the Court Security Improvement Act of 2007. Rep. John Conyers, D- Mich., the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee introduced a companion bill in the House today. The House bill is also a bipartisan measure, sponsored by Chairman Conyers, Robert C. “Bobby” Scott, D-Va., and Louie Gohmert, R-Texas.

By Cookie Sale

January 29, 2007 04:19 PM | Link to this

WASHINGTON - Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer testified Monday that then-colleague I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby told him over lunch that the wife of a prominent war critic worked at the CIA.

Fleischer said the conversation happened July 7, 2003, days before Libby told investigators he was surprised to learn about the CIA operative from a reporter. That discrepancy is at the heart of Libby’s perjury and obstruction trial.

Fleischer is a key witness because, as Fitzgerald said in his opening statement: “You can’t learn something on Thursday that you’re giving out on Monday.”

Scooter’s goin to tha big house and with a name like ‘Scooter’ he’s gonna be everybody’s darlin.

Boy, when the Democrats offer this shiite-bag a get outta jail free card for his testimony, ‘All the President’s Men’ is gonna look like a Girl Scout cookie sale. Shades of Watergate, how high will it go OR will Scooter get a nice plush cushy cell in Allenwood with carpet, TV, sports yard, communal visitation, and pizza delivery like Nixon’s Watergate ‘plumbers’ did to do his probably abbreviated time in?

If not, how’s this gonna play out? Will Bush pardon Cheney, then resign so that Cheney can pardon Bush back, or will both need another Gerald Ford so that neither ever has to pay for their criminal actions? Is Crawford, TX the new San Clemente? So many questions and so little time until 2008!

Fitzmas is still coming dear Bushbots. ‘All good things come to those who wait’!

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:20 PM | Link to this

REID: WE SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO TAKE AMERICA IN A NEW DIRECTION

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Washington, DC—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Speaker Nancy Pelosi today released the following statement on President Bush’s sixth State of the Union Address.

“Congress has demonstrated in the last three weeks that great things happen for the American people when we work together. In his sixth State of the Union Address, President Bush once again talked about many of the issues facing our country. It is long past time to stop talking about our problems and start working to solve them. The Congress is delivering results, and doing it in a new way - by reaching across the aisle and putting the American people first. Tonight, we welcomed President Bush’s overtures of bipartisanship and we hope to begin working with him to move our country in a new direction.

“Energy independence is a national security issue and an economic security issue. President Bush’s goals for energy independence are commendable, but we now must get straight to work on a real national energy policy. In Congress, we have already begun work in earnest on renewable fuels, on global warming, and on shifting energy tax incentives away from Big Oil. We ask the President to join us to take real steps forward.

By bon scott

January 29, 2007 04:21 PM | Link to this

By Bye Danish - January 29, 2007 10:27 AM - How could “a Republican”, which I assume refers to GWBush put us “into debt exactly 6 months later”? What are you basing this statement on?

I believe they’re based on the truth. A concept (“Mission Accomplished!” “Candy and Flowers”, etc) that neocons have a serious problem with.

One of life’s largest truths is never expect a fact from a Bush-bot.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:21 PM | Link to this

REID DELIVERS ADDRESS ON THE STATE OF OUR UNION

Friday, January 19, 2007

Washington, DC—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada addressed the National Press Club this morning to deliver Democrats’ national Address on the State of Our Union. The new Democratic Congress is committed to working in a bipartisan fashion to make Nevada and the rest of the country energy independent, to express the overwhelming opposition of the American people to the President’s plan to escalate the war in Iraq, and to take America in a new direction. Below are his remarks as prepared:

Thank you Speaker Pelosi for that introduction and for the leadership you provide our party and our country. You’ve made history, and Americans – regardless of their partisan perspective – share joy in your achievement.

In its first 100 hours, the new leadership in the House has shown America that Democrats and Republicans can work together to deliver results. Last night – on the issue of ethics – the Senate scored its first victory of this new year, passing perhaps the most sweeping ethics reform legislation in history.

Now that we’ve changed the way Washington does business, it’s our job - and the job of every member of Congress – to keep moving America in a new direction.

The new Congress will confront many difficult issues in 2007, but none more important than keeping America safe. We live in a dangerous world. We face many threats. There are critical challenges around the world America must confront:

In Afghanistan, where the Taliban and al Qaeda are resurgent.

In North Korea and Iran, which continue to march forward with their nuclear programs.

In Darfur, where genocide rages, and elsewhere in Africa, where poverty and sickness are leading to mass human suffering and dangerous instability.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:22 PM | Link to this

In Latin America, where Chavez and Castro want to put their leftist mark on young democracies.

And in the Middle East and here at home, where, as the Speaker indicated, we need to find a way to free ourselves from our dangerous dependence on oil.

These are just some of the national security challenges we face. Unfortunately, we have yet to adequately confront these or other problems, because this Administration has been all consumed and, frankly, overwhelmed by its own failed policies in Iraq.

The Iraq war has now lasted longer than World War II – a war that took us to far away Okinawa across North Africa and throughout the continent of Europe.

The costs of the war have been staggering.

We’ve lost 3,025 of our troops, and seen tens-of-thousands more wounded. The war has strained our military, and depleted our Treasury. Last year, violence claimed the lives of at least 34,000 Iraqis – a rate of almost 100 a day.

Yet despite these tremendous costs, despite this great sacrifice, the Iraq war has made America less safe, not more safe. Our troops in Iraq - including hundreds of fine Nevadans - have done everything asked of them. It’s their political leaders at home who’ve failed.

We must change course.

Unfortunately, the President’s new plan can be summed up in four words: “more of the same.”

Like our military generals, the American people and a growing bipartisan chorus in Congress, I believe escalation is a serious mistake.

As both our top commanders in the region - Generals Abigail and Casey - have testified, Iraq is experiencing a violent civil war. Interjecting more U.S. military forces will not end the civil war, only a comprehensive political settlement by the Iraqi government will.

For over a year, Democrats have been proposing a better plan for Iraq: a plan based on what is in the best interest of our country now and in the long-term fight against terror and a plan embraced by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.

Our plan for Iraq begins by transforming the military mission. The mission of our troops should be transitioned away from combat to training, force protection, logistics and counter-terror. U.S. forces have been given an impossible mission - - policing a civil war. It’s Iraqis – not our troops – who should be walking the streets of Baghdad, trying to sort friend from foe.

Next, we should begin the phased redeployment of U.S. forc

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:23 PM | Link to this

A phased redeployment will allow our country to rebuild the military force here at home, and increase the number of troops available to hunt for Osama bin Laden and stabilize Afghanistan.

Third, we need to bring Iraq’s neighbors into the process of stabilizing the country. This step will not be easy for an Administration that has failed at diplomacy. Yet, diplomacy is exactly what is needed.

The violence won’t stop in Iraq until all factions agree to stop the violence.

It is true, the Iranians and the Syrians have played a destabilizing role in Iraq, but that doesn’t mean we can’t communicate with them as part of a regional framework. As Secretary Jim Baker of the Iraq Study Group noted, we must talk to our enemies, not just our friends.

Our plan for Iraq will do what this President has been incapable of doing: turning Iraq over to the Iraqi’s and bringing our troops home. This is what the majority of Americans voted for last November, and this is what Congress will continue to hold the President accountable to do.

As Speaker Pelosi said, the President’s plan will receive an up-or-down vote in both Chambers of Congress. With that vote, our hope - - our prayer - - is that this President will finally listen. Listen to the Generals. Listen to the Iraq Study Group. Listen to the American people. And listen to a bipartisan Congress. The answer in Iraq is not to “double down” – literally to do more of the same. The answer is to find a new course that brings this war to an end.

Let me say more about votes in Congress. When we hold the up-or-down vote - and in the many votes that follow - our troops will get everything they need. It is the President who will find he no longer has a blank check.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 04:23 PM | Link to this

rushncap

As I understand it, Plame had covert status at one time. She worked ops overseas. She worked Operations - many, if not most, there, have their identities concealed and unofficial/official covers to prevent the chance of harm to programs they’re working. She was working the WMD section, specifically directed, I believe, against Iran (now there’s an interesting thought - “Plame authors position paper warning of Iranian nuclear/WMD program”). As I’ve said, referring to anyone who was at that level, particularly with a reporter, may have been dumb, vindictive, venal, ill-advised, but not, under our current statutes, prosecutable. Fortunately, that’s the way our criminal justice system works.

I’d even wager if the Administration did propose tougher definitions, penalties, and controls on reporting personnel information - even in the press - many here would blow a gasket.

The “Wilson told liberal blogger Plame was covert” comment was from factcheck.org

Link:www.factcheck.org/article337.html

July 16, 2003 – Wilson speaks about his conversation about Novak’s column with David Corn, Washington bureau chief for the liberal magazine The Nation. According to what Corn writes on his blog at thenation.com, Wilson says, “Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her entire career.” Corn says Wilson is still “known to friends as an energy analyst for a private firm.” (” A White House Smear ,” The Nation, July 2003; Wilson, Politics, 349 ). Corn’s entry is the first instance where someone alleges publicly that the release of Valerie Plame’s name disclosed the identity of a covert agent.

Novak referred to her simply as an “Agency operative.”

I haven’t found anything to contradict this.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:23 PM | Link to this

The days of a rubberstamp Congress are over. This Congress – unlike the previous Congress - will always put the needs of our troops first. We’ll keep America’s promises to our soldiers, our veterans and our National Guard. And after years of overuse and neglect, we’ll rebuild and reinvest in the military, so it remains the finest force in the world.

As much as we’re convinced the President has chosen the wrong direction in Iraq, we’re increasingly concerned he’s headed in the wrong direction in Iran and Afghanistan .

Five years after we defeated the Taliban, the extremists are returning. Drug production is soaring. And attacks on U.S. and NATO forces are on the rise. By all measures, the country is at risk of slipping away; yet, some reports suggest the President will be moving some U.S. troops out of Afghanistan and into Iraq. This is a terrible mistake.

Although time is short, there is still an opportunity to defeat our enemies in Afghanistan once and for all. The President must acknowledge what’s at stake, and immediately take action to prevent the country from returning to what it was – a haven for international terrorism.

Much has been made about President Bush’s recent saber rattling toward Iran. This morning, I’d like to be clear: The President does not have the authority to launch military action in Iran without first seeking Congressional authorization - - the current use of force resolution for Iraq does not give him such authorization.

Let there be no doubt, the Iranian regime poses one of the great threats of the new century, but the Iranian people - 2/3rds of which are under the age of 30 - - present a great opportunity for progress. Regrettably, this Administration has no strategy for connecting with this generation of potential reformers.

One of the reasons Iran is free to thumb its nose at the world community is oil. Iran sends millions of barrels of crude oil to the Western world, and gets billions of dollars in return.

Fortunately, we have the power to turn the tables on Iran. That power is energy independence. If the United States led the world in developing new alternative fuel technologies, we could create new jobs, export new products, slow global warming and reduce Iran’s leverage on the international stage.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:27 PM | Link to this

When it comes to energy, the Congress has already moved forward on a number of fronts – from reducing global warming to promoting renewable fuels to mandating ethanol from biomass. On Tuesday, we’re looking forward to the President finally joining the energy debate. For our security, our economy, and our environment, we must pull together and secure America’s energy future.

Fortunately, I know we can.

Like all Americans, I vividly remember September 11, 2001 and the days that followed. Democrats and Republicans stood together as Americans in doing whatever it took to keep our country safe.

9/11 was a terrible day, but it showed our country united and strong, with the world by our side.

Regrettably, bipartisanship – and the alliances that shined so bright after 9/11 – have been challenged in recent years: the President’s conduct of the war in Iraq has divided our country and our allies. The White House’s detainee policy and abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo have damaged our moral authority. And this administration’s disdain for diplomacy has hardened our enemies, and cost us opportunities in the developing world, where extremists are out-working the U.S. in the battle for hearts and minds.

Together this year, we must reclaim that bipartisan spirit. It shouldn’t take a national tragedy to get us to work together. We should be equally inspired by our responsibility to keep America safe.

From Afghanistan to energy, our challenges are great, but we know America can meet them. And we know we must begin by changing course in Iraq.

In Congress, we’ll continue working with Republicans to keep America safe, and we’ll listen to President Bush Tuesday night. Together, we must move in a new direction, and build a safer, stronger nation

By Paul

January 29, 2007 04:28 PM | Link to this

Dusty 4:07

I never had the honor. But anyone who can burn food, give it a fancy name and have it become a smash hit is worthy of admiration!

The beef recipe I used came from Jeff Smith aka “The Frugal Gourmet.” Most excellent. The lemon meringue pie was from Cook’s Illustrated - they cook water and corn starch, then mix it into the stiff egg whites. Works quite well.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:28 PM | Link to this

Press Release of Senator Reid REID FOCUSES SENATE ON ENERGY POLICY

Effort will enhance America’s energy and environmental security

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Washington, DC—Standing alongside the new Committee Chairs who will be key in transforming the nation’s energy policies and moving legislation through the United States Senate, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada today announced the new Senate Democratic majority is moving forward to bring dramatic change to America’s energy policy. “Nevadans and Americans alike are ready to confront the enormous challenge of energy independence,” said Reid. “I am making better energy policy a top priority of the Senate to make our country safer, lower energy rates, create domestic jobs, and protect the environment. In Nevada, more than 3,300 jobs would be created—primarily in rural areas—if we invested more in renewable energy solutions.”

Reid, Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye, Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, Homeland and Government Affairs Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman, and Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer announced that their Committees will begin working right away on new legislation to begin to deliver results for the American people.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:29 PM | Link to this

America’s national security and economic prosperity, not to mention the future health of the planet, demand a radically new course. The Senators today made clear their commitment represented a paradigm shift for how Congress will address America’s energy future. From now on, energy legislation will not be a means to prolong the failed policies of the past. Instead, Congress will direct its attention to investing new strategies and new alternative energy technologies to bring about the change the American people expect and demand.

This new commitment represents the first—and critical—step toward freeing America from its dependence on foreign oil and the national security threat it represents, tackling the growing problem of global climate change, and developing the new and job creating technologies that will power America’s economy in the 21st Century. A recent study by the nonpartisan Apollo Alliance suggests that a major investment in alternative energy technologies could add more than 3.3 million new jobs to America’s economy, stimulate $1.4 trillion dollars in new Gross Domestic Product, and pay for itself within 10 years.

For the past six years, despite mounting evidence of the threat of global warming, growing evidence of the threat posed by our dependence on foreign oil, and massive profit growth by OPEC and Big Oil on the backs of American consumers, little has been accomplished in Washington to address our nation’s energy security. The new Democratic Congress is committed to changing course, delivering results, and taking America in a new direction.

By RE

January 29, 2007 04:32 PM | Link to this

I am a little confused here. I know there is one statute specific to outing covert operatives, but is there any law out there for revealing classified information? You can debate the definition of covert all day long, but clearly she worked on classified operations, had an official cover as an energy analyst, and kept here work with the CIA secret.

Also, if you name someone as working for the CIA, you do not really need to clarify that they were covert with the CIA to blow the cover.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 04:32 PM | Link to this

Goldie 4:18

I tossed a barb your way a couple days back saying I’d never met an ideologue until I’d “met” you. I don’t care to make such comments - personal nonsense gets in the way if policy and issue discussions.

Identity crisis? Hardly. Possibly you’ve come to the conclusion I see (and have for some time) that there’s an awful lot of shades of gray between black and white?

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:33 PM | Link to this

Press Release of Senator Boxer Boxer to Chair East Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee of Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Washington, DC — Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) will chair the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs for the 110th Congress. The subcommittee has jurisdiction over U.S. relations with many nations crucial to California’s trade and security interests. Senator Boxer said, “This subcommittee assignment offers exciting opportunities to play an active role in the peace and stability of East Asia and the Pacific. Our state of California has a strong interest in the economic, security and human rights issues of this region. I look forward to exploring them in a comprehensive and bipartisan manner.”

The Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs has jurisdiction over U.S. relations with all nations and geographic entities in the East Asian and Pacific region, including Australia, Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, China (including Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and Macau Special Administrative Region), East Timor, Fiji, Indonesia, Japan, Kiribati, Laos, Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia, Nauru, New Zealand, North Korea, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Vietnam.

Boxer will also serve on the Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs Subcommittee as well as the Subcommittee on International Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs, and International Environmental Protection.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:34 PM | Link to this

Press Release of Senator Boxer Boxer Reacts to President’s Lack of a Global Warming Plan

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Tonight was a missed opportunity for the President to exert strong leadership on the challenge of global warming. By not presenting a comprehensive plan to combat global warming, the President is ignoring the consensus of eleven National Academies of Science, clear decisive action by our communities and states, and a growing coalition of businesses that realize that they have a responsibility to solve this problem.

For me, the President’s speech was more notable for what he didn’t say on global warming than what he did say. When you get to the bottom line, there are no hard caps, no enforcement mechanisms, and we aren’t even going to start reversing the increase in carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector for 10 years.

The President is taking baby steps to deal with a giant problem. I urge the President to listen to all of the voices that are coming before the EPW committee to confront this challenge, not just pay lip service to it.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:34 PM | Link to this

Press Release of Senator Boxer Boxer Pleased California Delegation is Working Together to Address the State’s Agricultural Disaster Needs

Friday, January 19, 2007

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) released the following statement after her office hosted a meeting between the staffs of some of California’s elected officials to address the impact of the freeze on California’s agricultural community. Senator Boxer said, “The more I learn, the more worried I am about the impact of this freeze. I am really glad that we are all working together to use every tool at our disposal to be of assistance to our growers and our farmers in this difficult time.

Boxer continued, “We are exploring possible legislation for crop disaster assistance and worker assistance to ensure that we are meeting the needs of the communities that have been hit so hard by this crisis.”

The meeting included representatives from the offices of Senators Boxer and Feinstein, Governor Schwarzenegger, and Representatives Cardoza, Capps, Costa, Radonovich, Nunes, McCarthy and Farr.

The entire California Congressional Delegation sent a letter yesterday afternoon to Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns calling for the immediate approval of Governor Schwarzenegger’s request for a federal disaster declaration in California.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 04:36 PM | Link to this

Paul — well, it’s my understanding that they are not being prosecuted for the leak but for lying about it. I’m not shedding any tears.

I don’t know what will come of it. But I’m seriously in the “Al Capone” mood. This administration has gotten away with criminal behavior for so long, and with such egregiousness that at this point I don’t much care HOW they get the suckers, just that they get them. If it’s a technicality, at this point I’m so sick of those lying, war-mongering SOBs that I’ll go with that.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 04:37 PM | Link to this

Political Foreskin

Could you possibly schedule a bris?

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:46 PM | Link to this

Press Release of Senator Boxer Senators Work to Protect Americans from Perchlorate

Thursday, January 4, 2007

Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), incoming Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, today introduced two bills that will help protect the American public from drinking water contaminated by the toxic chemical perchlorate. Senator Boxer was joined in introducing the bills by Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). Lautenberg is the incoming Chairman of the water quality subcommittee. “We must do everything within our power to make drinking water safe for every American family,” Senator Boxer said. “Perchlorate threatens the health of those most vulnerable, and these bills will go a long way toward protecting them.”

“Serious questions have been raised about the health risks of perchlorate-contaminated water, particularly for pregnant women and children,” Senator Feinstein said. “The EPA has a fundamental responsibility to provide American families in California and across the country with the peace of mind that the water they drink is safe. And I think all parents would agree that they have a right to know whether their children are drinking water contaminated by perchlorate. That’s why it’s crucial that the EPA continue to test for perchlorate, to alert residents to the health risks when their drinking water supply has been contaminated, and to establish a clean-up standard.”

By Paul

January 29, 2007 04:48 PM | Link to this

RE 4:32

Oh yeah, there are several statutes, as well as individual gov’t agency regulations, defining punishments for release of classified information. Espionage Act comes to mind, possibly Sedition Act. They’ve been used.

Remember Aldrich Ames? He’s in max security isolation - one reason this entire Plame whoopla gets me - there was a guy (CIA) spying for the Russians, passed on lots of classified, KGB (Putin’s old organization) tortured and killed dozens. Did terrible injury to the US. Most every op, cover organization, etc. was blown.

I haven’t looked into it - but it appears the Brewster & Jennings “false front” company some cite as Plame’s “cover” was widely used - even during the time Ames was passing information to the Russians. I would have imagined CIA would’ve scrubbed those fronts. But they kept on using it after Ames was apprehended. Makes me shake my head.

By Political Foreskin

January 29, 2007 04:48 PM | Link to this

“Rocket fuel should be reserved for rockets, not our nation’s drinking water,” said Senator Lautenberg. “The Bush administration has failed to protect the public’s drinking water and warn people of potential health threats. This legislation is an important step forward to provide Americans with the health protections they demand.”

Perchlorate is found in the drinking water supplies of over 20 million Americans and particularly threatens pregnant women, infants and children. It comes from rocket fuel and other sources and has polluted at least 35 states. Yet the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has thus far refused to set a standard for safe perchlorate levels in drinking water.

The first of the two bills introduced today would direct EPA to promptly establish a health advisory, followed by a drinking water standard, for perchlorate. The standard would have to protect the health of pregnant women and children. The second bill would assure that tap water is tested for perchlorate and that the public be notified when drinking water is contaminated.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 04:50 PM | Link to this

Paul - LOL re the “bris” comment.

By Dusty

January 29, 2007 04:54 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Yum! Nicest thing I’ve heard today.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 04:55 PM | Link to this

rushncap

Yup - never mess with Federal (or other) prosecutors. I have a family member, used to be a deputy DA for a major city, is now a criminal defense attorney. His deadly serious advice (formulated after working both sides) is NEVER talk to the police without a defense attorney present. Never. Life isn’t like “Law and Order.”

“Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.” Louis Jenkins

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 05:04 PM | Link to this

Thanks Paul. I’ll keep that in mind. I don’t anticipate ever needing it, but this certainly is something I’ll keep in mind. Although, since I never watch Law and Order, I’m not sure what you mean by that last comment.

By LuckoDull

January 29, 2007 05:06 PM | Link to this

Who got Polly’s panties in a wad?

There were a few tense moments, however, including an encounter involving Joshua Sparling, 25, who was on crutches and who said he was a corporal with the 82nd Airborne Division and lost his right leg below the knee in Ramadi, Iraq. Mr. Sparling spoke at a smaller rally held earlier in the day at the United States Navy Memorial, and voiced his support for the administration’s policies in Iraq. Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling.

“Support” the troops, eh?

That defines liberalism to a tee.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 05:19 PM | Link to this

Lucko-Curl,

Atrocious behavior by a single ‘spitter’ does not ‘define liberalism’ anymore than Eric Rudolph ‘defines conservatism.’

IF (Giant ‘IF’) you had an unretarded brain, you wouldn’t have to resort to such ridiculous stretches to ‘define liberalism.’

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 05:27 PM | Link to this

Not to mention, LHU, that I think given the choice between getting spit on or having his leg back Mr. Sparling would almost certainly choose the latter. So why is it, exactly, that this protestor is worse for spitting on him than Bush is for dragging him off to a war where he lost his leg and gained nothing for his country?

By LuckoDull

January 29, 2007 05:45 PM | Link to this

LHU: Coming from a person who would probably key someone else’s car over some minor disagreement, I don’t expect you to understand honoring the sacrifice of our soldier’s, whether you believe it’s right or wrong.

You actually define liberalism even better than the spitter does.

What a small person you must be.

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 05:52 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Wasn’t that Sir Walter Scott? Or am I missing your reference?

rushncap,

Not everyone is as selfish as you. You might want to read up on Joshua Sparling before you spew your nonsense.

By RE

January 29, 2007 05:57 PM | Link to this

You jacked po-fos name and posted over and over and no one paid attention, does that get you upset. Settle down.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 06:01 PM | Link to this

Yes, RW, I’m terribly selfish for wishing that guy had his leg still. How awful of me.

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 06:01 PM | Link to this

Lucko-Curl,

‘Atrocious behavior’ is BAD (the opposite of GOOD) - am I going too fast for you?

Are you so stupid that you thought ‘atrocious’ was a compliment?

I’ve seen turnips smarter than you…

By nuff-said

January 29, 2007 06:06 PM | Link to this

Please recall that Bush said he would sack the leaker. Well, guess who is the “Leaker-in-Chief”? Bush wanted to punish Valerie’s husband Joe Wilson. Wilson refused to lie for Bush. He told the truth about no link between Iraq-Uranium-Niger. Something Bush put in the SOU address; which he knew was false. Bush was willing to sacrifice our nation’s security for revenge. He had to get Wilson. He had to send the message throughout government that he was a real “tough guy”. “If you cross me I will do anything to get you, even if it involves breaking the law”. There’s vintage George W. Bush!

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 06:06 PM | Link to this

RE @ 5:57,

We can’t expect much from trash like LHU, but I really thought you were above making that last sentence.

Sybil (or is it Sara) bon fincie,

Did you figure out you were wrong again when you sent that nasty email yesterday?

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 06:11 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

I don’t expect you to understand this, but you didn’t say you wished that Sparling had his leg back. You said that you were sure that he feels that he would rather be spit on than to have lost his leg in combat. If you bothered to read anything about the man you would realize that isn’t the least bit true.

I wouldn’t be surprised if you were the one that sent him a card, while he was at Walter Reed, that ended…PS DIE.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 06:12 PM | Link to this

RW (the original)

I know of about five references for the quote.

Maybe Hillary (all right, and the rest of the candidates) could adopt it as a campaign slogan?

Nawwww….

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 06:17 PM | Link to this

RW-(the obfuscator),

Did I offend you by saying Eric Rudolph did NOT ‘define conservatism?’

Or was it something else?

By getalife

January 29, 2007 06:17 PM | Link to this

I see Andy is up to his old tricks.

Needs another trip to rehab, he has relapsed.

Poor guy.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 06:18 PM | Link to this

nuff-said

Jesus visits this forum in the morning. Maybe he can resurrect that dead horse for you.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 06:20 PM | Link to this

I’m sorry that your ability to read is this far behind my ability to write. Ah, hell, who am I kidding, I’m not sorry. Yes, I guarantee you he would rather have a leg than wipe off some spit. You’re a total moron if you think otherwise.

PS up yours

By getalife

January 29, 2007 06:20 PM | Link to this

Just imagine Bill Clinton back in the WH with total power of a large Dem majority in the House and Senate.

Karma.

By Midori

January 29, 2007 06:21 PM | Link to this

Spitting Image

by digby

So the dirty, long haired hippies spit on wounded veterans yesterday. Isn’t it just like them…

There were a few tense moments, however, including an encounter involving Joshua Sparling, 25, who was on crutches and who said he was a corporal with the 82nd Airborne Division and lost his right leg below the knee in Ramadi, Iraq. Mr. Sparling, who was not scheduled to speak, addressed the counterprotesters to voice his support for the administration’s policies in Iraq.

Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back.

How awful. And it turns out that poor PFC Sparling has been treated terribly by these DFH’s time and time again. Michele Malkin reported on another awful incident back in December.

He has become such a famous victim that he and his parents even went to the State of the Union address at the invitation of Dennis Hastert.

Some might find it odd that such terrible treatment would befall the same man —- first he gets a terrible Christmas card (Christmas!) that tells him to “go die.” Then, he was spat upon by protestors —- a myth of the 1960’s come to life right before our very eyes. What are the odds?

Luckily the New York Times, which obviously reported his spitting incident without even the most cursory google search on his name, is helping to perpetuate this story for a new generation. From now on, any search of “spitting on Iraq veterans” will turn up this incident to back up the inevitable future claims by wingnuts that they were mistreated by the dirty hippies of 2007. Good job NY Times. That’s why they call it the paper of record.

much more about this at http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 06:22 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Well Sir Walter Scott wrote it in a poem in the first decade of the 1800’s. I know it’s erroneously attributed to Shakespeare pretty often.

By @@

January 29, 2007 06:26 PM | Link to this

OMG Paul!!! Never has anything so funny been presented with such brevity.

(((Political Foreskin)))

(((Could you possibly schedule a bris?)))

I’d give you a bunch of those HA HA thingies, but I’ve pledged never to appear hysterical.

By Midori

January 29, 2007 06:27 PM | Link to this

Rushncap - you don’t know how right you are.

He is a complete, utter moron.

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 06:27 PM | Link to this

LHU,

You don’t offend me at all, you’re just trash. No need to get your panties in a twist over it.

By One Voice

January 29, 2007 06:27 PM | Link to this

So I’m prepping the students for their study of Inherit the Wind by having them read Mark Twain’s The Lowest Animal, his satirical response to Darwinism. Of course, before they read it I have to review Darwinism with them. The Lowest Animal is a wonderful piece found in every literature text in the country, a scathing indictment of religion and false patriotism, the two things every Republican holds most dear. When we’re done with that they’ll read the logical arguments in Inherit the Wind, and hopefully by that time most of them will be questioning the existence of god. I know Dull, Dusty, rw, and Granny have to love that.

By Lyle

January 29, 2007 06:28 PM | Link to this

Imbecile Bush is again threatening Iran today. Whom will he send into that so-called war, the Cub Scouts? Despite our sophisticated weaponry, we are unable to keep up with a gang of crazed unarmed civilians. That was always highly predictable long before the first shot was fired. Only Bush and braindead scum such as you fail (still) to realize that hard fact. We continue to train our Army just as we did during the Cold War. Big tank and artillery battles. Days that have long been gone. This failure obsessed SOB has lit a fuse which runs through and around the entire Middle East, well into Europe and beyond. The world will never be remotely the same due to this goon and his chickenhawk worshipers. What a pitiful lot you are. Rave on in your gross collective ignorance.

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 06:28 PM | Link to this

getalife,

You sound like Sara Sybil Bon Scott’s pet parrot. That’s not a good thing.

Paul,

fyi, I haven’t had time to read your Scooter Libby posts, so you may be familiar with this already, but this OP ED is by Victoria Toensing who, with others, actually crafted the law that was not broken by Scooter Libby.

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 06:31 PM | Link to this

Paul,

More from the knowledgeable Ms. Toensing,about Patrick Fitzgerald and Joe Wilson.

By Paul

January 29, 2007 06:31 PM | Link to this

RW

I knew the quote - use it on occasion - but not the attribution. Did a cursory check for the author (you mean you can’t believe everything you read on the Internet?)- but I’ll use Sir Walter Scott. Pretty early reference. Plus, his name has cachet.

By nuff-said

January 29, 2007 06:32 PM | Link to this

Paul: Since it’s “dead horse” Are we agreed Bush lied to get us into Iraq, lied about Wilson, lied in his SOU address, outed Plame and is now hanging hapless Libby as the fall guy?

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 06:33 PM | Link to this

Somebody stole my Link! I’m blaming it on Sandy Berger.

Paul - here’s the link that was supposed to go with the 6:28 that clarifies the law as it relates to Valerie Plame.

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 06:38 PM | Link to this

RW-(the obfuscator),

Didn’t think you had a reason…

No offense here. I actually feel sorry for anyone still carrying water for this incompetent Administration.

Hey, it won’t be long before all the candidates for the Republican nomination are repudiating this administration too (that is those that aren’t already).

Should be fun to watch when you start calling Chuck Hagel, Rudy G., Romney, Newt, etc. ‘Trash.’

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 06:39 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

That’s why I prefaced my remark with “I don’t expect you to understand this” and you didn’t disappoint.

PS: GFY

By Paul

January 29, 2007 06:44 PM | Link to this

nuff-said 6:32

I think I can agree this entire affair/farce/trial is being used for political purposes.

Buy Danish

Thanks for the link. I trust you didn’t have to retrieve it from where Sandy tucked those (really) classified documents!

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 06:48 PM | Link to this

LHU,

I don’t call you trash for your political opinions, just your overall essence and lack of any decency.

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 06:51 PM | Link to this

Paul,

No I didn’t, but I sure wouldn’t mind visiting him in a jail cell to give it back to him.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 06:52 PM | Link to this

Poor poor RW. What a waste of skin. Oh well….

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 06:53 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Speaking of political motives, are you aware of the theory that Fitzgerald really has it in for Libby because he was Marc Rich’s lawyer and helped screw up the case he had on him?

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 06:54 PM | Link to this

RW-(the obfuscator),

I will lose sleep tonight knowing that a complete dipwad has questioned my ‘essence.’

Alas, at least I don’t have to bear the burden of supporting the most incompetent President in the history of our nation…

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 06:56 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

If I may add to RW’s GFY, F/U would be redundant, so I’ll start fresh with - TrueU.

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 07:06 PM | Link to this

rushncap,

Speaking of skin, why don’t you tell us about why you claim to use porn so that you won’t have to touch the skin of the wrong girl. But please spare us the details of how you use it.

LHU,

No need to lose any sleep. If you don’t want to believe what I say that’s fine. Your words are here day in and day for all who read this blog to see your immaturity and make up their own minds. Everybody I know is convinced I’m right about you.

By rushncap

January 29, 2007 07:08 PM | Link to this

Muffin, darlin’, save your breath. You’ll need it to produce your biggest contribution to this world: CO2. And you wouldn’t want to deprive the world of your most important contribution, would you?

By Lord Help Us

January 29, 2007 07:08 PM | Link to this

Yes, RW-(the obfuscator),

You see, if I were lacking decency, I would close my posts with little gems like, ‘PS:GFY.’

What a model of ‘decency’ you are…

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 07:12 PM | Link to this

LHU,

And if you weren’t brain dead you would see that it was a direct response to rushncap’s “PS: Up Yours” comment.

By bon scott

January 29, 2007 07:23 PM | Link to this

By One Voice January 29, 2007 06:27 PM - So I’m prepping the students for their study of Inherit the Wind by having them read Mark Twain’s The Lowest Animal, his satirical response to Darwinism.Don’t stop there, Voice! Get your students to read Twain’s “The Innocents Abroad”!! They’ll learn that foreigners treat visiting Americans with even more vitriol than Americans treat them. The joke is doubly funny because the Americans JUST DONT GET IT!!! They’re like the organ grinder’s monkey who doesn’t realize HE’S THE JOKE!!! It’s as funny now as it was then!

By RW-(the original)

January 29, 2007 07:58 PM | Link to this

Sybil (or should I say Sara) bon finchie,

Are you trying to tell us it wasn’t the evil Chimperor that made them hate us?

Why don’t you send me a few more emails to post? I need a break from the Hillary posts and your hysterical cackling is just the thing to break up the boredom.

By Buy Danish

January 29, 2007 09:02 PM | Link to this

Rushncap,

You may know a lot about the stability of Heteroduplexes, but the bottom line is that you’re an arrogant little squirt who is too big for your ski pants.

If you were as smart as you think you are you’d realize that you’re not quite so smart after all.