Smell Test

Letter To the Campaign Finance Committee

2006-03-01T15:17:00.000-06:00

Here is a copy of a letter i wrote and sent to several Senators on the Campaign Finance Comittee in 2004, before all this stink about Abramoff and the new level of the rotting stink of corruption in our Government.

i have recently been reading books about campaign finance. i have to tell you i'm feeling a bit sick to my stomach about what goes on. there is no difference between a bribe and a campaign contribution in my view. (and i'm sure in everyone's view if they knew what was going on.) so i have decided to send you a version of real campaign finance ala shelley. (smile)

no member of congress or their families will accept any contributions whatsoever. nor will they receive any gifts or services from anyone or any multiplicity in any election cycle.
meals shall not exceed $50.00 (i would change this now to, "buy your own meals, i do".
the capitol bank will start charging fees for overdrafts.
the post office will stop buying back unused postage.
t.v. stations will be required to give equal air time to any candidate in his state who collects a total of 10% (negotiable) of the population's signatures. no more free rides for those who own the people's airwaves.
transportation to and from ESSENTIAL government work will be provided by a fund specifically for the purpose of such work. no more vacations and free rides from the poor to the rich on military transport or from the rich to the rich in private jets. there are no loopholes here either. it's very clean cut. a member of congress accepting anything that could possibly influence his or her vote is strictly illegal.
we the poor and the median pay our taxes, it's time the congress stopped pretending they were kings and queens out there fulfilling the needs of the poor when all they are really doing is finding ways to make the rich richer (including themselves by accepting contributions from the rich) off of the backs of the poor. we don't pay taxes so that congress can live high on the hog. we pay them so that our needs (not our flighty desires) are met. roads, schools, safety of ourselves and our children from combat weapons, teachers, medical, help for the homeless, defense when we are really in danger, food for the hungry, police, fire, clean water and air. not more restrictions lifted from and tax breaks given to the energy, oil and chemical companies because they took someone in power out to dinner and donated huge sums of money to them. do you remember those values?
money is not free speech. if it were it would mean that hundreds of millions of us without it have no voice and only those with money do. can't anyone see that this is exactly what is happening?
furthermore, privatizing health insurance helps nobody but the insurance companies. they're in it for the money. they are in it to make the biggest profit they can. how can that possibly help the poor and uninsured? a not-for-profit health plan is the only reasonable solution to the grotesque cost of health care these days.
and what is this about "faith based initiatives"? am i going to be paying for religious charities against my will (and possibly my belief system) through my taxes? i refuse. this isn't iran for gods sake, even though bush is starting to look a little bit like the iatollah.
i believe you are an honorable person (senators name), but i know that even you (and every other member of congress) must have accepted money which made you (and them) vote against your (and their) conscience. if there is a senator or house member who hasn't i'd like to know who they are. money is so corrupting. our congress and president are not above being corrupted by it as i'm sure you know very well by now.
i hope you get this letter because all of this reading i've been doing has set a fire under me that won't go out without real reform in our government (and i would add now "our campaign funding system").
why do corporations pay fewer taxes than most median income families? why should multi-millionaires not pay the inheritance tax? i can't even get a gift of $500.00 without claiming it and paying taxes on it.
why can't campaign finance be clean cut and simple as in my proposal? why does it have to have so many loopholes for anyone to climb through? why aren't 527's held accountable for the honesty of their ads? looking at this election years' ads i'd think that anything goes. call someone a cannibalistic child molester and they'd get away with it. the whole process has become so nefarious. please call on your fellow senators to do something real to stop the influence of corporations and big money (against the interest of we the little people who pay a huge chunk of our incomes in taxes) on our representatives.
yours respectfully,
shelley (the naive)

Your Tax Dollars At Work for Campaign Doners

2006-03-01T13:19:00.000-06:00

If you knew everything they do you'd march on Washington and throw them out by the seats of their pants. Leave it to TomPaine.com to keep us informed where it counts.
"Between 2000 and 2004, health insurance, health services and pharmaceutical companies contributed $96,370,907 to candidates for public office—71 percent going to Republicans (That means 29% went to Dems). Thirteen administration and congressional officials who were in key positions during the writing and passage of this bill now work for pharmaceutical companies. This includes Rep. Bill Tauzin, R-La., who is credited with guiding the law’s passage and now works for the drug industry's top lobbying group, PhRMA, as one of the highest-paid lobbyists in Washington. Bush’s former Medicare chief Tom Scully is now the top healthcare lobbyist for law firm Alston & Bird. Both reportedly negotiated their lobbying contracts while working on the so-called Medicare reform law from inside the U.S. government."
"...they made it illegal for the federal government to negotiate the price of drugs with manufacturers, despite the fact every other industrialized nation negotiates these prices. When the government does negotiate lower prices for bulk drug purchases, as does the Veterans Administration, it saves more than 40 percent compared to the market cost. Applied to Medicare, this would save about $560 billion over the first eight years of the program. The cost of the disastrous Medicare plan is even greater when the subsidies given to insurance companies are factored in."
It's like i have always, and will always say, privatizing means maximum profit for minimum service. I hate these thiefs. They take the money of the masses and give it to the corporations. You can stop it by writing and complaining to your elected officials.
To contact ANY Senator or Representative call any of these toll free numbers:
1-888-355-3588
1-888-818-6641
1-800-426-8073

Soldiers Want Withdrawl From Iraq Within the Next Year

2006-03-01T12:42:00.000-06:00

According to a Zogby poll in conjunction with Le Moyne College's Center for Peace and Global Studies, 72% (of the soldiers in Iraq) said the US should withdraw within 12 months, and 29% said they should pull out immediately.
Although Mr Bush has acknowledged that Iraq played no role in September 11, 85% of the troops said the US mission was mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9/11 attacks”.
77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was "to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq."
Do you see why our men and women believe they are there? They believed the lies of the commander and chief... now they think that it's we and anti-war groups, that don't understand what's going on in iraq.
52% said either the anti war group at home are unpatriotic or don't understand the mission in iraq.
Sounds to me like they've been duped and just don't know it yet. Poor suckers. I always thought we should be able to believe in our government and what they told us too. But this administration made it clear from the moment they turned Iraq into an accomplice with 9/11 that they could not be trusted. Now i don't believe a word they say.
Save our soldiers from their commanders and save them for when we really are threatened.
If Bush told me that Iran had a nuke pointed at my house, i'd laugh at him. I'll never believe another word he says.

Makes Sense to Me. How Bout You?

2006-03-01T11:07:00.000-06:00

Szep - Civil War

Posted on Feb. 27, 2006

By Paul Szep

One clever blogger at Truthdig.com commented on this cartoon:

Comment #4373 by C. M. Baxter on 2/28 at 10:02 am

Bush: “There’s bombings, bloodshed and civil war in Iraq. Water and electric utilities are down and the country is in complete shambles.”

Chaney: “Good. I think our work there is done. Let’s pull out and move on to Syria. Then Iran!”

Now I get it.

The Argument For Popular Votes.

2006-02-28T14:37:00.000-06:00

Is there any reasonable argument as to why we still use the electoral college to elect our presidents? Why don't we have popular elections? If we did, the person voted for by a majority of Americans would be president rather than the courts having to settle the argument for us. It's really the only way democracy can be a reality instead of a sham. TomPaine.com is on a roll today with another great article on popular elections.
"Polls consistently show that a large majority of Americans favor electing the president through a national popular vote over our dysfunctional Electoral College. This system makes most Americans irrelevant and is no more accurate for choosing a winner in close contests than a coin flip. No argument in its defense holds up to scrutiny."
more...

We Haven't Done Any Good At All In Iraq.. On The Contrary

2006-02-28T14:32:00.000-06:00

Oh yeah.. we have them on the ropes.. We are winnnig this war! all we have to do is...
An article at TomPaine.com tells us what we have to do and what actually has been done:

Bush and Cheney had hoped to rescue their failure in Iraq by four interlocking measures: first, the creation of an independent Iraqi military and police force that could take on the insurgents; second, a gradual drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq to placate U.S. domestic opposition to the war; third, the establishment of a modicum of security in Iraq, enough to allow economic reconstruction to proceed; and finally, the cobbling together of some sort of credible Iraqi government. Let's take those four, one by one.

First, late last week, in the midst of the Golden Dome explosion, the U.S. military quietly announced that the number of fully trained Iraqi army battalions capable of fighting independently had fallen from one to a grand total of zero— yes, zero — over the past three months. Said Army Col. Jeffrey Snow, seemingly without irony nearly three full years after the U.S. invasion: "The growth of a new army cannot be instantly realized."

Second, as 900 more Marines left Hawaii over the weekend for Iraq, and 7,000 more U.S. soldiers began preparing to head for Iraq soon, various U.S. military spokesmen began to drop broad hints that more, not less, U.S. forces might be needed in Iraq. According to Gen. Mark Kimmitt, "There might be a need for more American forces." According to the Army Times , Gen. George Casey, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, is deciding whether or not to ask for more troops. The 56-page quarterly report by the Pentagon dated February 17 said: "Coalition force levels will increase, if necessary, to defeat the enemy." It also noted that (even before the post-Golden Dome violence) that attacks on U.S. forces had risen to an all-time high of 550 per week since October.

Third, the security environment in Baghdad and surrounding provinces is worse, and more terrifying, than it has ever been. On SundayThe Washington Post reported :

The streets of the capital feel as unsafe as at any time since the 2003 invasion. As one U.S. major put it, Baghdad now resembles a pure Hobbesian state where all are at war against all others and any security is self-provided.

It's a Mad Max world. It's rule by mob, by militia, by gangs and warlords and renegade mosque leaders. The Independent , the British daily, says that as many as 1,000 Iraqis are being tortured to death or executed, largely by Shiite militia forces and rogue police, army and Interior Ministry units, citing as its source the United Nations' former human rights chief in Iraq.

And fourth, a stable government of national unity, if it ever was a possibility, is now nearly an impossibility. The Golden Dome bomb attack came nearly 10 weeks after the Dec. 15 election, and even then little or no progress had been made toward creating a government. The new parliament has yet to meet even once, missing its statutory deadline.
Post continues at TomPaine.com

So what did you say Americans are paying a possible 2 trillion dollars for in Iraq?

When You Don't Know Who The Enemy Is You Kill The Natives

2006-02-28T13:40:00.000-06:00

Once you admit that we went to war in Iraq based on lies this administration told us, you have to ask yourself, "if there was no reason for going there, who is the enemy and why are we killing people?" This article tells us what happens when you kill people who are only killing us becasue we are there killing them. Our presence there is illegal and the people we were supposed to be liberating are now our enemies. Read this riviting article from TomPaine.com. It'll knock your socks off.

In September 2002 Secretary General of the Arab League Amr Moussa warned that the invasion of Iraq would "open the gates of hell."

Here's a vision of that hell as reported this month by journalist Tom Lasseter of Knight Ridder Newspapers, embedded with the U.S. Army in Samarra:

Five soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division scrambled down, pulled two of the insurgents' bodies from the reeds and dragged them through the mud. "Strap those motherf-----s to the hood like a deer," said Staff Sgt. James Robinson. The soldiers heaved the two bodies onto the hood of a Humvee and tied them down with a cord. The dead insurgents' legs and arms flapped in the air as the Humvee rumbled along. Iraqi families stood in front of the surrounding houses. They watched the corpses ride by and glared at the American soldiers.

This stark image is as good a metaphor as any for the current military and political posture of the U.S. and its allies in the Middle East.

Across the region—and beyond— Arabs and Muslims are now glaring at U.S. power in the same way as those Iraqi families glared at the soldiers of the 101st Airborne.

This is what our billions are paying for. Tell your congress persons and senators "not in my name!"

Remember when it was only going to cost tax payers 1.7 billion?

2006-02-28T13:03:00.000-06:00

I remember hearing the war hawks on the news telling Americans that the war in Iraq was only going to cost Americans 1.7 billion.. I remember them saying that Iraqi oil would pay for most of the reconstruction... that was then, this is now:
"A study by Columbia University economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard lecturer Linda Bilmes projects the long-term cost of the Iraq war may EXCEED 2 TRILLION (!!!!!!!) DOLLARS." And it's coming out of your pockets. You are paying for the chaos in Iraq. The incompetence and the building of hatred for the United States. And mostly for the corruption.
3 years ago Ted Natsois the US AID director told us straight faced:
"And that's why this whole thing is gonna cost the US taxpayers nothing. $1.7 billion was the estimate from US AID director Andrew Natsios. That's what he told Ted Koppel on Nightline, to which Koppel responded with the flat incredulity of the last serious newsman on the networks: "You're not suggesting that the rebuilding of Iraq is gonna be done for $1.7 billion?" asked ABC's Ted. Natsios went further on a limb: "Well, in terms of the American taxpayers contribution, I do, this is it for the US."

From TomPaine.com:
update 2/28/06: " President Bush just sent Congress a request for another $72.4 billion for the Iraq war and occupation. Instead of writing another blank check, Congress should commit itself to a thorough investigation of the incompetence and corruption that has undermined the reconstruction mission. At the same time that it demands that the administration provide a clearer overall strategy in Iraq, Congress should establish a permanent committee on war profiteering and corruption modeled after the one Harry Truman chaired during World War II.

So far, the only effort to hold contractors accountable for illegal or incompetent actions has been in the courts. On February 13th, arguments began in the first high-profile civil fraud case filed against an Iraq war contractor. Two whistleblowers are charging Custer Battles LLC with using sham invoices and offshore shell companies to defraud taxpayers of $50 million while performing security work.

With Halliburton receiving over half the value of the Iraq reconstruction contracts, all calls for accountability have automatically been dismissed as a partisan attack on the vice president or an element of the anti-war agenda that threatens to undermine troop morale.

Senator Ensign finally held his hearing earlier this month, (but) no other Republicans were present. A cynic might say that he is merely going through the motions to try to take the issue off the table before the fall elections. Yet if Ensign were to drill deeper than his investigation has gone so far, he would probably find that the contractors like Halliburton have not only bilked taxpayers, but some of their actions have undermined the military’s overall mission.

This lack of oversight isn't only a fiscal concern; it also has dangerous implications for U.S. troops. Two ex-employees of Kellogg, Brown & Root—a subsidiary of Halliburton—for example, have charged the Army’s number one contractor with exposing U.S. troops to contaminated water from the Euphrates .

"I don't know how many [troops] might have gotten sick as a result," says Ben Carter, one of the two KBR whistleblowers, who has 20 years of experience working as a water purification expert. "I can't know, because Halliburton apparently has no records and refuses to acknowledge there might be a problem."

Because the issue has as much to do with fiscal responsibility as it does with protecting American troops, Congress should provide for much greater oversight before giving Bush and Rumsfeld another $72 billion check. The incompetence, cronyism, and corruption witnessed in Katrina-related contracts underscores the need for much greater oversight.

Legislation requiring contractor accountability should apply the lessons of Iraq to all federal contracts. Not only do we need to crack down on the kind of cronyism that puts incompetent people in the wrong places, and no-bid contracts like those given to Halliburton, but clear criminal sanctions are needed for war profiteering as well as new protections for those brave enough to blow the whistle. All of this and a vigilant Congress willing to investigate is needed to create a shift in contracting culture"

And to make matters worse, the NYT's today has this:
The Army has decided to reimburse a Halliburton subsidiary for nearly all of its disputed costs on a $2.41 billion no-bid contract to deliver fuel and repair oil equipment in Iraq, even though the Pentagon's own auditors had identified more than $250 million in charges as potentially excessive or unjustified.

I don't know about you but i'm getting pretty damned sick of it. I think it's time for an on line tax system where we choose what percentage of our money goes to what programs.. including the military. Let's find a way to keep their filthy hands off of our money and put it where it belongs, supporting our troops and supporting America.

Oppression of The People is Happening. Freedom and Liberty? What's that?

2006-02-26T14:06:00.000-06:00

Mean while, over at Progressive.org Matthew Rothschild keeps tabs on the erosion of our civil liberties. One of the only things that's really worth fighting for in in this world in my humble opinion.
Home land security agents approached a man with anti war stickers on his truck and said: "“Sir, you'’ve got signs posted on your vehicle. I'’m informing you that you'’re in violation"”
"Laura Berg is a clinical nurse specialist at the VA Medical Center in Albuquerque, where she has worked for 15 years. For writing a letter critical of Bush, her bosses decided to investigate her for "sedition."
"“Cindy Sheehan, who gave her own flesh and blood for this disastrous war, did not violate any rules of the House of Representatives."
"Deb Mayer was a teacher of fourth, fifth, and sixth graders at Clear Creek Elementary School in Bloomington, Indiana, during the 2002-2003 school year, when she was told not to talk about peace in class".
"“The bottom of the envelope had been slashed open and then retaped with green tape. And it said, "‘Opened by Border Protection"’ in great big letters."
Are you appalled yet? There's plenty more over at progressive.org
kmilyun posted:
How would you feel if you were surfing the internet at your local public library and two uniformed Homeland Security officers walked in and announced that in the interests of national security to everyone that they were not allowed to visit porn sites?

Katrina on Ted Kopple (Duh It's The Oil Stupid!)

2006-02-26T12:13:00.000-06:00

Anybody with any honesty or journalistic integrity had to admit from the beginning that this war was about oil. With men like Scott Ridder and Joe Wilson out there telling us that there is no way Saddam was a threat to us, what other reason could there have been? It was all lies from the beginning and now, with the oil corporations making record breaking profits, we can see what it was really all about. Bush and Cheney stink of blood and oil but they'll be laughing all the way to the bank, no matter what becomes of Iraq.

"In the New York Times on Friday, Ted Koppel – now a columnist free from the strictures of ABC-Disney – lays it on the line in examining the undeniable role of oil in our continuing occupation of Iraq. Koppel notes, "….America's rapt attention to the security of the Persian Gulf is what it has always been. It's about the oil."

Hmmm….I seem to recall hearing some ideas along those lines – years ago – from the likes of Michael Moore in Farenheit 9/11 and many other lefties & progressives as well. They were each summarily dismissed – not just by the right but also by many in the MSM – as "unpatriotic," "conspiracy-theorists," "paranoid," "un-American," "simplistic," "leftists," etc."

Katrina vanden Heuvel on clean elections movement

2006-02-25T21:27:00.000-06:00

This is a subject near and dear to my heart. Since way back in the early 90's when they were making noises about campaign finance reform.. I thought then, and i still think now, that you cannot reform a system that is innately rotten with corruption to it's very core. When it was decided that money was equal to free speech, it was decided that public representatives could be bribed legally. Today over at TheNation.com Katrina vanden Heuvel (we love her here at smelltestblog) has written an article on public financing of political campaigns.
Here is a taste of her article:
Until elections are publicly financed, big money will continue to dominate politics and legislation--from health care to trade to minimum wage initiatives--will continue to be crafted in the interests of corporations, not citizens.
"...and the continued stench of national scandal will lift reform efforts in Washington DC and across the country this year and beyond."
In other electoral reform news, the Center for Voting and Democracy has launched an excellent new initiative that would give equal representation to voters in presidental elections. The plan, backed by Common Cause and a bipartisan group of Congressmen, would bring states together in support of a national popular vote.

When is Killing is ok? It's a Matter of Opinion and we All Have One

2006-02-25T17:17:00.000-06:00

I've always thought it along the lines of bizarre that a person could, on the one hand, say it was ok to go to war and kill strangers who you don't even know or to sentence a criminal to death out of revenge but when a woman is unable or unwilling to become a mother for what ever reason she may have, they draw the line and call this a moral sin... Murder. Killin is killin folks and revenge is the basest of emotions. Yet we have legalized it in America and cling to it with a tenacity only found in psychopaths. We are the only civilized nation left on the planet that still uses the death penalty. We're up their with Saudie Arabia and Iran on this one. War? The whole concept of killing men, women and children you don't even know for some grand ideal. What ideal could be so great that it would call for the murder of strangers? This concept is even more bizarre than killing for revenge. What, killing strangers is ok as long as I'm imposing my beliefs or my system of government on them? Anyway, here's Barbara!
Mahablog.com has a thought provoking article today about when we allow killing and when we don't.
An excerpt:
The reason weÂre even having this discussion (on issues of life and death) is to settle the question of abortion as a matter of law. But as a legal matter, the question of when humans are allowed to take the lives of other humans rarely has absolutist answers. Some kind of regulation about who can kill whom is necessary for civilization, since we canÂt very comfortably live together in communities without some assurance our neighbors wonÂt throttle us in our sleep. But there are always loopholes. Through history, in many societies (even Christian ones), a noble could kill a peasant or slave without penalty. Today governments can order wars or impose a death penalty, and legally thatÂs not murder. (my commelegallyally but morally it is murder!)
Good point Maha. Someday there will be forced abortions to control population like there is in China. Over population strains a planet with limited resources. They will probably give prizes for those who volunteersterilizelize themselves in the future..

The New Dark Ages Ala Boy Emperor Bush

2006-02-25T16:52:00.000-06:00

Truthdig.com has published an article from renowned intellectual, Gore Vidal which discusses the state of the U.S. today as reminiscent to the world just before the fall of the Roman Empire. Take a look here's an excerpt:
"We were already in our twilight phase when Ronald Reagan, with all the insight of an ostrich, declared it to be morning in America; twenty-odd years later, under the boy emperor George W. Bush (as Chalmers Johnson refers to him), we have entered the Dark Ages in earnest, pursuing a short-sighted path that can only accelerate our decline. For what we are now seeing are the obvious characteristics of the West after the fall of Rome: the triumph of religion over reason; the atrophy of education and critical thinking; the integration of religion, the state, and the apparatus of torture a troika that was for Voltaire the central horror of the pre-Enlightenment world; and the political and economic marginalization of our culture. "
Rock on Gore. We hear ya buddy.

Should we Care who Secures our Ports?

2006-02-25T15:17:00.000-06:00

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has a web site that is designed to keep voters informed as to the actions they are taking in this government to separate themselves from Republicans. This past few years they've been very weak kneed and I believe it's time for a strong third party. One that isn't corporate owned at the expense of all that is good for Americans except business. They have an article on port security and bills they tried to pass that failed. They give a little bio of the UAE. I put this here only to get us thinking about how we should interact with the world after 9/11. Should we lock our borders and keep everyone out or should we carry on as if nothing ever happened? Or should it be somewhere in between and if it is in between, what does that mean? Where is in between in selling our ports?
Here is a short bio of the UAE:
The UAE was one of three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are the other two.
The UAE has been a key transfer point for illegal shipments of nuclear components to Iran, North Korea and Libya.
According to the FBI, money was transferred to the 9/11 hijackers through the UAE banking system.
After 9/11, the Treasury Department reported that the UAE was not cooperating in efforts to track down Osama Bin Laden's bank accounts.

Bush and his friends don't like their true colors being shown

2006-02-24T17:13:00.000-06:00

DemocracyNow.org has the story that says it all today: Won't investigate price gouging but will investigate a leader who had helped the poor. It's beyond comprehension.
Venezuelan-Owned Citgo Faces Congressional Inquiry For Offering Discounted Oil to U.S. Poor
In Washington, Republican Congressman Joe Barton of Texas has launched an investigation into one of the world’s major oil companies. But he is not investigating whether any of the oil giants are engaging in price gouging at a time when gasoline and heating oil casts are skyrocketing. Instead Barton has set his sights on the only oil company that actually dared to lower its prices last year - at least for the poorest Americans.

What They Say vs. The Truth

2006-02-24T15:43:00.000-06:00

There's a great site called American Progress Action Fund. They have a page called "Claims vs Facts" that lists everything the who's who in politics ever lied about and the truths of the matters.
Excerpts:
Topic: Economy - Taxes Speaker: Bush, George - President Date: 9/5/2003 Quote/Claim:"Tax relief means new jobs for Americans. [Source: White House Web site]" Fact:"Since Bush's first tax cut in June, 2001 the economy has shed 2.75 million jobs. - CBPP" Reference Reference

Topic: Health Care Speaker: Bush, George - President Date: 9/4/2003 Quote/Claim:"We must fix the problem of frivolous lawsuits against our doctors and hospitals. [Source: White House Web site]" Fact:"The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found last year that malpractice costs account for a very small fraction of total health care spending and that even radical reform would have a relatively small effect on total health plan premiums. - CBO, 9/25/02" Reference Reference

and finally:
Topic: Environment Speaker: Bush, George - President Date: 9/29/2000 Quote/Claim:"[If elected], Governor Bush will work to…establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide. [Souirce: Bush Environmental Plan] " Fact:"I do not believe that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide. - President Bush, 3/13/03" Reference Reference

They just didn’t care: Iraq on the Brink

2006-02-24T15:32:00.000-06:00

Tom Paine has an extreamely relevant article today by Robert Dreyfuss today:
"The CIA, the State Department, members of Congress and countless Middle East experts warned Bush and Cheney— to no avail— that toppling Saddam could unleash the demons of civil war. They said so before the war, during it and in the aftermath, and each time the warnings were dismissed."
Why is it that we progressives knew all along but Bush claims not to have known? How could he not have known that taking out one of the only secular leaders in the Middle East would cause chaos? Now it has been replaced by a radical Theocracy and looks like civil war is on the brink.
In America when the state says you are guilty of treason you are put in Guantanamo and not given a trial. You are tortured and maybe even killed, even if you are not guilty. In Saddam's Iraq he knew who the enemies of his state were and he dealt with them by imprisoning them and torturing them too.
Heads up on TomPaine.com they only keep the articles on for a short time then you have to look in the archives for them.

MRI's a Threat to Privacy. Can you Say Thought Police?

2006-02-23T17:09:00.000-06:00

Over at Kmilyun.com she has posted an article from Wired magazine about MRI's being used as lie detectors and some potential other uses such as invasive thought reading to see if you are a danger, say, at the airport. This article is a must read. Here's an excerpt:
Britton Chance, a professor emeritus of biophysics at the University of Pennsylvania states the next step in MRI technology and use:

”is to develop a system that can be used discreetly in airports and security checkpoints for “remote sensing” of brain activity. […] “It would certainly represent an invasion of privacy”

Talk about Thought Police. In the realm of Civil Rights and this administration’s record, I do believe there is cause for concern that this technology’s development will be more along the spying aspect than the medical research lines.
Rock on Kmilyun!

Somebody's Tracking Youuuuuuu!

2006-02-23T15:27:00.000-06:00

Mother Jones, as usual has a very thought provoking article on one of the less spoken about technologies that are actually in use now. Even Orwell wouldn't have believed this one!
"Tiny chips implanted under your skin tracking access and movement: that may sound like something out of a science fiction movie, but these identity tags , more commonly known as RFIDs, could become the wave of the future."
One concern is that these chips might eventually be used for corporate product-tracking. Here’s an example of how this would work: You walk into a supermarket and pass by an innocuous-looking RFID reader. Due to the RFID chip on your credit card, the store knows what you’ve purchased in the past. You then pick up a six pack of Pepsi that has RFIDs attached to each can. Because another RFID reader is in place, when you keep the six-pack in your hands for 15 seconds before putting it back down, Pepsi’s marketing department records this information in order to improve its labeling. When you leave the store with a 6-pack of Coke and walk through a reader, Coke records that its product has just left the store. When you get in your car and pass RFID readers as you get on and off the freeway, the RFID chips on your shirt send information about where your shirt is. When you put your 6-pack in a fridge that also has an RFID reader attached, Coke knows where your soda is. When six cans pass by the reader on the way out of the fridge, Coke knows that the 6 pack is done. Coke then sends you coupons to buy more Coke and also updates your kitchen shopping list.
The worst part of this is that people are lining up like lambs to the slaughter to get these chips inserted into their arms to make their lives more convenient. To prevent loved ones from wondering off. How bout just putting a collar on them that explodes if they get more than 100 yards away from the house! another nice sci fi solution.

Jack Who? Oh yeah! That Jack!

2006-02-23T15:12:00.000-06:00

Meanwhile, over at the Dark House in Washington...
The Washington Post writes:
"But now, as in the photo, Mr. Abramoff somehow has gone blurry in Mr. Bush's memory. The president doesn't recall meeting or posing for pictures with him.

"Mr. Rove's memory is fuzzy, too, as luck would have it. His name, according to the Associated Press, was rather routinely dropped by Mr. Abramoff as his big White House contact. Mr. Abramoff's former assistant, Susan Ralston, went to the White House to work for Mr. Rove, and, the Associated Press reported yesterday, Mr. Rove's office helped set up a 2002 meeting between Mr. Bush and the prime minister of Malaysia, another Abramoff client. One Abramoff business associate reported being in the lobbyist's office when Mr. Rove's office called to confirm the meeting."

Conservation Incentives are only for the Energy Companies..Not We who Conserve.

2006-02-23T14:56:00.000-06:00

Over at the Beacon Journal a little blip on how serious Oil Man Bush is about saving energy. His new mascot is a pig that gobbles up oil.. I think he and his oil slurping buddies are inside the mascots suit. Here's the story:

"As gasoline and winter heating costs soar, the Bush administration's short-term answer has been conservation, even unveiling a cartoon mascot dubbed 'Energy Hog' to bring home the case for lowering thermostats.

"But consumer and energy efficiency advocates are complaining that the president's budget goes the other direction, cutting energy conservation programs -- including two the administration has touted repeatedly...

"Particularly perplexing to energy conservation advocates are the administration's proposals to cut the government's ''Energy Star'' program that promotes energy-efficient products and to slash funding for a program that helps poor people weatherize their homes.

"The two programs have been cited repeatedly by the White House and the Energy Department. They are listed among the most cost-effective ways to save energy. Yet the administration wants to cut funding for the Energy Star program, most of which is administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, by 9 percent from this year's $55.9 million, and roll back the weatherization program by nearly a third, from $243 million to $164.2 million."

Some other Effects of Global Warming

2006-02-22T17:59:00.000-06:00

I'm very proud to post this article because my husband Prasad, who is a Doctorate in Oceanography, did the physics in this paper. Over at earthobservatory.nasa this article talks about how abnormally high nitrate levels (because of anamolous temperatures) lead to first over production of sustenance (phytoplankton) for sea life and then to poisoning it.

1984 Plus 20 Years Signs of the Times

2006-02-22T14:21:00.000-06:00

A friend of mine over at kmilyun.com has written a great page on Orwells' 1984. It is so perfectly representative of what is going on today that it's a must read. WAR IS PEACE! IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH! you go kmilyun!

Campaign Finance is the only Solution to Corruption

2006-02-22T13:43:00.000-06:00

<>I've been thinking about public financing of political campaigns for a while now and I have come to the conclusion that it is the only way to curb corruption in our government. As long as nominees have to beg for money to buy campaigns, dirty money will inevitably have to cross their palms. As it stands today, campaign financing is little more than legal bribery. Over at TheHill.com today Republican Senator George Voinovich is actually talking about public financing of campaigns.
"Paul Miller, president of the American League of Lobbyists (ALL) and a partner at Miller/Wenhold Capitol Strategies“ says, ‘To pay for this, we’re going to tax corporate America,’ I don’t think that’s fair,” Miller said.'You’d have to do the other side of it and tax labor too, since labor will be paying for this as well.'<> he called the public-financing concept 'nice on paper,' criticizing elements of the House public-financing bill introduced last month by Reps. David Obey (D-Wis.) and Barney Frank (D-Mass.). The Obey-Frank proposal would raise money for federal campaigns through a Federal Election Commission (FEC) advertising campaign supplemented by a levy of one-tenth of 1 percent on corporate profits exceeding $10 million."
I submit to you that if there were public financing of political campaigns there would be so much extra money floating around Washington that you wouldn't have to raise one dollar in taxes to fund those campaigns. That you would just have to reallocate funds from pork barrel projects that lobbyists lobby for and put that money into public financing. I could actually imagine huge surpluses in government and a world where tax breaks actually didn't hurt the US.

Ken Mehlman on What is Treason

2006-02-22T13:34:00.000-06:00

I don't know if this is real or not.. If it is it is beyond bizzare.
Over at Spittalandink.com they have posted a letter on the letter head of the Republican National Committee. A memo from Ken Mehlman on what is and what is not treason. here is a small example:

Not treason… lying to the American People and the United Nations about WMD’s in a foreign country that clearly didn’t have them, except for what we gave them when we had the White House last time.

Treason… lying about a blowjob.

Not treason… outing an undercover CIA agent currently fighting the War on Terror, specifically doing so for political advantage.

Treason... … revealing to the public the secret, unconstitutional, warrantless wiretapping of American citizens by the government.

Oh the list goes on! just go check it out at the link i provided above.

Bush’s Policies Don't Promote Growth

2006-02-21T17:44:00.000-06:00

In an article over at MotherJones.com John Irons and Lee Price write that... "The tax cuts failed to produce the burst of economic activity the president promised. Instead of doing better than in past business cycles, the economy has grown sluggishly, at a rate far slower than in previous cycles The most common measure of economic activity, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), grew only 13.5% since the first round of tax cuts were passed in early 2001, averaging 2.7% per year. The average for similar periods in the past was far better – growing 16.3% or 3.2% per year.:
Would you know this by listening to the hyperbole over at the White House? According to them we have a stronger economy than at any other time in history. At this blog you will hear the term "Orwellian" an inordinate number ot times because we are living in the Orwellian world of 1984. If the Bush administration is saying it you can believe it is a lie or a complete adulteration of the truth. Hate is good! Poor is rich! What ever is, isn't, and whatever isn't, is.

Halliburton Wins (No Bid) Contract to Reconstruct Cheney's Reputation

2006-02-21T17:04:00.000-06:00

Over at one of my favorite blogs "Truthdig.org" the most mind boggling story of the day: "The Halliburton Co. announced today that it had won a $42-billion no-bid contract from the U.S. government to reconstruct the reputation of Vice President Dick Cheney." Excuse me, but $42 billion? No bid? For reconstructing a reputation? This is such an unapologetic tax payer give away it's sickening. Believe it or not, tax payers are going to pay Halliburton $42... yes $42 billion (with a B) to patch up poor little Dickies reputation. How is it that we continue to let them do this to us? When will enough be enough? You must all write to your representatives and stop this robbery of the American tax base for frivolous spending.
To put this in perspective, the Bush administration allocated $62 billion for Katrina relief. Is Cheney two-thirds as important as every man woman and child affected by Katrina? How do you want your tax dollars spent? Relief for the suffering masses or repairation of Dick Cheney's reputation? I am agog at the balls of this administration.

U.S. Warns Iraq It Won't Support Sectarian Goal

2006-02-21T16:53:00.000-06:00

Wha wha what's this???? We liberated and democratized Iraq so that they could vote for their own leaders and now that they've voted for radical sectarian leaders we're saying we won't support them??? Tell me again what we're doing over there? Tell me again about spreading freedom, liberty and democracy? I'm sorry i didn't hear you... did you say that we respect these things and will only work with countries who practice these ideals as well? Trust me when i tell you that the Bush administration didn't see this coming even though a first grader would have had to seen it as a possibility. This administration has caused such a deep hatred of anything Western that Arabs will cut their own throats (by voting in a theocracy) to avoid being Westernized. This war has caused this radicalization of simple people over there that before the war couldn't have cared less about humiliating the US.. Now that we have caused so much trouble over there, even the moderates are voting with the radicals. Anything to get us out of there. Maybe what they want is for Bush not to support them anymore. With friends like Bush, who needs enemies?

U.S. Reclassifies Many Documents in Secret Review

2006-02-21T16:37:00.000-06:00

This story is in the NYTimes . The government is reclassifying historical documents as secret again. "One reclassified document in Mr. Aid's (intelligence historian, Matthew M. Aid) files, for instance, gives the C.I.A.'s assessment on Oct. 12, 1950, that Chinese intervention in the Korean War was "not probable in 1950." Just two weeks later, on Oct. 27, some 300,000 Chinese troops crossed into Korea." Why would this administration try to cover this up. Are we trying to rewrite history like they did in Orwells' "1984"? The things that are happening today are eerilly similar to everything that "1984" was about. Somebody is always watching you now, wether on line or on the phone.. you can bet that "for your own good" they are watching and listening to everything you say. How else could they possibly be spying on contacts of Al Queda unless they're going through everyone's mail and phone calls sifting out little nuggests of intelligence?

Who Owns your Representatives?

2006-02-17T16:29:00.000-06:00

Opensecrets.org has all contributions reported for every representative in the House and Senate. Who owns your representative? and how did he or she vote on issues relating to their biggest donors? How did Oil and Gas companies make out and who did they support? How did Medical Insurance companies make out and who did they support? How did Drug companies make out and who did they support? Here is where you will find which corporations supported which candidates. It's sinister. The only solution i can see is public financing of political races. No money whatsoever, should touch the hands of candidates. Issues should be decided only on their merits. Chief Justice Warren Burger concluded that cash contributions to a candidate are equivalent to "free speech". I guess he really liked the idea of legalizing bribery. We have to call and write to our representatives and force them to overturn this law. Money is not speech it is bribery in the hands of campaign donors. If money is speech then most voting Americans have no tongue.

War Profiteers and How they control what you Think

2006-02-17T16:15:00.000-06:00

CorpWatch has a great site if you want to see just how interrelated Corporate America is. From energy corporations to TV stations, they are all owned by a handful of oligarchs. Monopolies are no longer illegal, they are seemingly encouraged, and to the complete detriment of the American worker. Patriotism apparently, now, only pertains to citizens, Corporations aren't required to be patriots. They only care about the bottom line and they will move all of their business over seas to sweat shops to make that bottom line as fat as it can get. We'd better have plenty of cheap Walmarts (heaven forbid) if this keeps up because most American jobs will be in the low paying service industry and all we will be able to afford is cheap Chinese goods

Oh that boring old Global Warming again.

2006-02-17T16:04:00.000-06:00

It's already too late to stop the disaster that is already happening.. it's too late to stop the sea from rising who know's how much. This article says sea levels could raise as much as 21 ft if we continue in the direction we are heading. Twentyone feet! That would take out every coast line in the world. Completely submerge many small islands. And what do we do? we talk about ethanol, (see article below) which takes more energy to produce than it produces itself.

Is ethanol really the answer?

2006-02-17T15:42:00.000-06:00

This article discusses the feasibility of ethanol manufactured from corn. Corn ethanol is very ineffecient in terms of fuel produced per acre of land planted. French sugar beets and sugar cane produce almost double the ethanol that corn does. "Ehanol Fuel from Corn Faulted as 'Unsustainable Subsidized Food Burning'" talks about how corn ethanol actually uses more energy than it creates. No this is no solution until manufacturing becomes much more efficient. We need to turn our eyes toward hydrogen (most plentiful element in the universe) fuel cells, better solar batteries and nuclear fusion.

Freedom of Expression

2006-02-16T14:57:00.001-06:00

When should freedom of expression be limited? English philosopher John Stewart Mill (1806-1873) , framed "the harm principle". ". . . the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." So the analysis on the subject of printing objectionable anti-Islamic cartoons should be based on this "harm principle". Does it matter if expressions harm feelings? Does the harm have to be physical? If so, does rioting and killing because of a cartoon count as physical harm to others? Is it enough to ban the publication of such pictures based on the "harm principle"? Here is an interesting cite on the philosophy of the question. http://www.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/freedom1.html#D

Treason

2006-02-15T16:17:00.000-06:00

When I type this word into the dictionary i come up with:
1. A crime that undermines the offender's government.
2. An act of deliberate betrayal.
There are others but these two pretty much sum up what Cheney and Libby did in the case of outting Valerie Plame Wilson. In case you've been abroad, say on Venus or Pluto for the past year, and don't know who she is; Ms. Plame was a covert CIA operative who's husband Joe Wilson, was sent to Niger to certify the claim that they were working on supplying yellow cake uranium (enriched for nukes) to Iraq. Our supposed reason for going to war; "imminent threat". Mr Wilson reported back that it was most unlikely that this was true and that the paperwork to support this claim had been forged in Italy. here's the story: http://www.sundayherald.com/print35264
The question now is, why isn't the Democratic party working toward the impeachment of this corrupt administration? To make it happen, write, call, tell your friend, start another blog http://www.blogspot.com. Do anything you can to start this peaceful revolution and keep it rolling till this government really is of, by and for the people.

Shot him in the Face.

2006-02-15T16:14:00.000-06:00

I don't know why this is making so much news. If we find out that Cheney shot this man in the face because they had a disagreement, then we have a story. Otherwise, this is just noise to fill up the band width and the air waves.

Are we to become breeders?

2006-02-15T16:06:00.001-06:00

A woman's right to choose is a fundamental necessity in an over populated and underfunded world. Poor women who cannot afford to raise children are being asked to "go ahead and have them and put them up for adoption". What? This is not an option. Why would a woman want to become a breeder for Repugs? What poor woman would want their child to be raised by those who make it harder for the poor as their single goal in life? The corporations, such as insurance groups, make it amost impossible to have children these days. Medical costs are out of this world as is the prospect of a higher education. The morning after pill, birth control and, if necessary, abortion have to be legal and available for a woman to be happy and healthy.

One Two Three, what are we fightin for?

2006-02-15T16:03:00.000-06:00

If this administration gets away with warrantless spying then we've given up the freedom and liberty we say we are trying to spread throughout the world. We've already lost the war on terror if we give up these ideals.