Amazing how Bush always seems to be on the positive end of the double standard he sets for himself huh??
"If there is corruption, I'm not surprised that people say, let's get rid of corruption. If government hadn't been responsive, I'm not the least bit surprised that people said, I want government to be responsive."
-- President Bush, 1/26/06, on corruption in the Palestinian territories
VERSUS
"President Bush today dismissed the significance of photographs showing him with disgraced Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff and indicated that the White House would continue to oppose releasing the photos, which he said are irrelevant to a federal investigation."
-- President Bush, 1/26/06, on corruption in the United States
Friday, January 27, 2006
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Compare Gore's Medicare Drug Plan to Bush's Debacle
During the 2000 presidential campaign, Democrat Al Gore had proposed a simple drug benefit that would have been delivered by Medicare—and not outsourced to private companies. His estimated a price tag of $253 billion over 10 years drew condemnations from Republican ranks. “Mr. Gore seems unconcerned about costs,” the Wall Street Journal sniffed.
To counter the Gore drug-benefit plan, Bush offered voters his privatized version—pulling out of his hat a price tag of $158 billion. When he pushed his plan to Congress in 2003, the number had risen to $400 billion. At the time, a government actuary had determined that the program would cost a lot more than $400 billion, but he shut up after the Bush administration threatened his job. And so taxpayers are now looking at a $724 billion bill.
To counter the Gore drug-benefit plan, Bush offered voters his privatized version—pulling out of his hat a price tag of $158 billion. When he pushed his plan to Congress in 2003, the number had risen to $400 billion. At the time, a government actuary had determined that the program would cost a lot more than $400 billion, but he shut up after the Bush administration threatened his job. And so taxpayers are now looking at a $724 billion bill.
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
I See the Republicans Proposed "Ethics" Legislation Today
Someone better get the RNC a dictionary so they can look up what ethics are:
Let's see who was involved in scandal BEFORE the Abramoff scandal broke:
REPUBLICAN Tom "The Hammer" DeLay had to step down as the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives two months ago after he was indicted on charges of breaking campaign finance laws.
REPUBLICAN Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice-President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, has been charged with perjury and obstruction of justice.
REPUBLICAN Bill Frist, the Senate Majority Leader, is under SEC investigation over allegations that he benefited from inside information for stock trades.
REPUBLICAN Randy "Duke" Cunningham pleaded guilty to charges of tax evasion and fraud. And cried like a little girl I might add.
REPUBLICAN Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, is still under investigation by the special prosecutor for charges related to outting CIA agent Valerie Plame, perjury, and obstruction of justice.
NOW we have the Abramoff Scandal. Abramoff is a GOP lobbyist who did NOT give any money personally to anyone not a member of the GOP (that's documented). Sure the GOP says Mr. Abramoff's clients -- those Indian tribes -- gave money to Democrats as well as Republicans but anyone with an ounce of sense can see that for smoke screen it is. The tribes were ALREADY giving money to Democrats before Mr. Abramoff entered the picture, Abramoff persuaded them to REDUCE those Democratic donations, while giving much more money to Republicans. All those FACTS aside, the GOP controls the House, the Senate, and the Presidency...golly who would people be bribing via a GOP lobbyist...those in power, the GOP, or those NOT in power. How many REPUBLICAN lobbyists that want to keep their job can you think of that would arrange for funding to be directed to Democrats? If you answered NONE, it shows you have a working brain. Congratulations.
It's going to be a VERY long year for the GOP ending in an election that is going to make them lose a considerable bit of power. The GOP is going to lose the House and perhaps the Senate, and if one of those things happen they could easily lose the presidency after Bush is impeached and prosecuted.
The GOP proposing ethics legislation is like having the fox design the hen house.
Let's see who was involved in scandal BEFORE the Abramoff scandal broke:
REPUBLICAN Tom "The Hammer" DeLay had to step down as the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives two months ago after he was indicted on charges of breaking campaign finance laws.
REPUBLICAN Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice-President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, has been charged with perjury and obstruction of justice.
REPUBLICAN Bill Frist, the Senate Majority Leader, is under SEC investigation over allegations that he benefited from inside information for stock trades.
REPUBLICAN Randy "Duke" Cunningham pleaded guilty to charges of tax evasion and fraud. And cried like a little girl I might add.
REPUBLICAN Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, is still under investigation by the special prosecutor for charges related to outting CIA agent Valerie Plame, perjury, and obstruction of justice.
NOW we have the Abramoff Scandal. Abramoff is a GOP lobbyist who did NOT give any money personally to anyone not a member of the GOP (that's documented). Sure the GOP says Mr. Abramoff's clients -- those Indian tribes -- gave money to Democrats as well as Republicans but anyone with an ounce of sense can see that for smoke screen it is. The tribes were ALREADY giving money to Democrats before Mr. Abramoff entered the picture, Abramoff persuaded them to REDUCE those Democratic donations, while giving much more money to Republicans. All those FACTS aside, the GOP controls the House, the Senate, and the Presidency...golly who would people be bribing via a GOP lobbyist...those in power, the GOP, or those NOT in power. How many REPUBLICAN lobbyists that want to keep their job can you think of that would arrange for funding to be directed to Democrats? If you answered NONE, it shows you have a working brain. Congratulations.
It's going to be a VERY long year for the GOP ending in an election that is going to make them lose a considerable bit of power. The GOP is going to lose the House and perhaps the Senate, and if one of those things happen they could easily lose the presidency after Bush is impeached and prosecuted.
The GOP proposing ethics legislation is like having the fox design the hen house.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
As the Rovebots keep saying....
about the ILLEGAL wiretaps that Bush used to BREAK THE LAW with...If you've got nothing to hide what are you worried about??
“The White House is refusing to reveal details of tainted lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s visits with President Bush’s staff,” reports the AP.
Hmmmmmmm...
We Need an Attorney General That Actually Knows The Law
"It's very, very important that the president has the agility and the speed to gather up electronic surveillance of individuals that may be in contact with the enemy."
-- Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, attempting to justify Bush's warrantless domestic wiretapping program, 1/16/06
VERSUS
"FISA law does include emergency provisions that allow warrantless eavesdropping for up to 72 hours if the attorney general certifies there is no other way to get the information."
-- Washington Post, 12/22/05
-- Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, attempting to justify Bush's warrantless domestic wiretapping program, 1/16/06
VERSUS
"FISA law does include emergency provisions that allow warrantless eavesdropping for up to 72 hours if the attorney general certifies there is no other way to get the information."
-- Washington Post, 12/22/05
Monday, January 16, 2006
Does anyone in the GOP have ethics??
>>> By now we've all seen this...
Md. Legislature Overrides Veto on Wal-Mart Bill
Maryland lawmakers bucked the will of the state's **Republican** governor and the nation's largest retailer yesterday, voting to become the first state to effectively require that Wal-Mart spend more on employee health care.
(Basically, so that the taxpayers of Maryland can quit footing the bill to pay for Walmart employees' healthcare and make Walmart do it.)
>>>Now check this out:
“Wal-Mart hosted a $1,000 [per-person] fundraiser for me?” Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich said on CNBC yesterday. “That is absolutely incorrect. Wal-Mart has not hosted any fundraisers.” His press secretary explained “Wal-Mart was not the host, just one of many hosts” but was “unable to identify any other sponsors.”
Gee he vetoed legislation BAD for Walmart but GOOD for the citizens of his state after Walmart gave him a bunch of money...no ethics violation there right? right?
WRONG.
Md. Legislature Overrides Veto on Wal-Mart Bill
Maryland lawmakers bucked the will of the state's **Republican** governor and the nation's largest retailer yesterday, voting to become the first state to effectively require that Wal-Mart spend more on employee health care.
(Basically, so that the taxpayers of Maryland can quit footing the bill to pay for Walmart employees' healthcare and make Walmart do it.)
>>>Now check this out:
“Wal-Mart hosted a $1,000 [per-person] fundraiser for me?” Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich said on CNBC yesterday. “That is absolutely incorrect. Wal-Mart has not hosted any fundraisers.” His press secretary explained “Wal-Mart was not the host, just one of many hosts” but was “unable to identify any other sponsors.”
Gee he vetoed legislation BAD for Walmart but GOOD for the citizens of his state after Walmart gave him a bunch of money...no ethics violation there right? right?
WRONG.
Monday, January 09, 2006
New Law Criminalizes Anonymous Annoying E-mails and Web Posts
We all better learn to think twice before clicking our mouses. A new law signed by President Bush last week makes sending annoying anonymous e-mails or posting annoying messages on websites a federal crime.
Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.....Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."
For people who comment on use-net groups and blogs, this could be a problem. Here's the actual text:
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.....Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."
For people who comment on use-net groups and blogs, this could be a problem. Here's the actual text:
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Worst President Ever
It's hard to REPRESENT the interests of the people IF you IGNORE what they want/need and Bush is completely out of touch with the needs and wants of the average American. The polls clearly show that with most Americans showing disapproval of Bush's policies and overall job performance.
Bush clearly looks at the polls but only to craft a message to attempt to trick people into accepting policies that are bad for them. Polls should be a tool Bush uses to gage what people want and act according to those interests when possible.
“Who gives a flying !*@@ what the polls say, I’m the President and I’ll do whatever I goddamned please. They don’t know &!^&.” are NOT the words of someone who is serving this country. They are the words of someone serving himself.
Worst president ever.
Bush clearly looks at the polls but only to craft a message to attempt to trick people into accepting policies that are bad for them. Polls should be a tool Bush uses to gage what people want and act according to those interests when possible.
“Who gives a flying !*@@ what the polls say, I’m the President and I’ll do whatever I goddamned please. They don’t know &!^&.” are NOT the words of someone who is serving this country. They are the words of someone serving himself.
Worst president ever.
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Cheney Hilariously Fails to Defend Breaking the Law...
The only 2 sentences in the article worth reading:
"A 1978 law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, forbids domestic spying on U.S. citizens without the approval of a special court. Bush secretly authorized the NSA to intercept communications without court approval."
"A 1978 law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, forbids domestic spying on U.S. citizens without the approval of a special court. Bush secretly authorized the NSA to intercept communications without court approval."
Sunday, January 01, 2006
Another Reason Not To Go To Times Square
for the New Year's Eve Celebration.
It's bad enough there are loud drunks, almost no bathrooms, and vomit and urine in the streets but NOW it's obviously a prime terrorist target. From NYTimes.com:
"While the party carried on in Times Square, late arrivals waited in long lines to pass through security checkpoints where police searched bags. The crowds were still merging on midtown for the celebration an hour before midnight."
Good thing we spent $500 BILLION on Iraq so we could all feel "safer" in our "free" and "open" society. Safe from the scary terrorists. BOO!!!
Enjoy your freedom while you're being patted down and strip searched and remember that $500 BILLION pissed down a hole in Iraq was a HUGE God damn waste. What the heck it's only OUR money and it's not like we have HUGE deficits, MAJOR cuts in education funding, Poverty increasing every year for the last 4 years, 45 million US citizens without health care, a city that needs to be rebuilt after being destroyed by a natural disaster, and an aging population currently retiring that will put a HUGE strain on the economy.
Happy New Year...if that's possible.
It's bad enough there are loud drunks, almost no bathrooms, and vomit and urine in the streets but NOW it's obviously a prime terrorist target. From NYTimes.com:
"While the party carried on in Times Square, late arrivals waited in long lines to pass through security checkpoints where police searched bags. The crowds were still merging on midtown for the celebration an hour before midnight."
Good thing we spent $500 BILLION on Iraq so we could all feel "safer" in our "free" and "open" society. Safe from the scary terrorists. BOO!!!
Enjoy your freedom while you're being patted down and strip searched and remember that $500 BILLION pissed down a hole in Iraq was a HUGE God damn waste. What the heck it's only OUR money and it's not like we have HUGE deficits, MAJOR cuts in education funding, Poverty increasing every year for the last 4 years, 45 million US citizens without health care, a city that needs to be rebuilt after being destroyed by a natural disaster, and an aging population currently retiring that will put a HUGE strain on the economy.
Happy New Year...if that's possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)