Tuesday, March 31, 2009


I know just about everybody with a blog, both conservatard and liberal including yours truly, has posted at least once about the artificial budget proposal from the Party of We Don't Have a Fucking Clue, but once I saw this at Alter Net this morning I just had to post again.

You see, this one mentions a Representative from my state, Wisconsin. The Rep's name is Paul Ryan. He is a Rethuglican. Now, before all of you start asking, no I didn't vote for this idiot. I can proudly say I have never voted for a Rethuglican, and never will. Hell, I'll go so far as to write in names on the county ballots because it's rare when there is someone other than a Rethug running for county office. I live in a very solid Rethuglican county.

But I digress and must get on with the show, so here it is.

From Alter Net:

The GOP's Alternative Budget Disaster

There were, we were told, two main reasons for Republican lawmakers to present an alternative budget. In the face of near-constant criticism from the White House and Democratic leaders on the Hill, the GOP's first goal was to prove that it had serious, credible ideas of its own. Republicans then said they wanted to demonstrate that the government could re-embrace fiscal responsibility, pursuing goals while reducing the deficit.

So far, the minority party is failing badly in both categories.

The first point quickly fell apart when Republicans unveiled a budget with no numbers in it. The second point isn't looking any better.

Last week, the House GOP presented its alternative budget proposal. Members of the media, including conservative commentators, widely panned the document for being scant on details and appearing more as "campaign-style talking points." Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), ranking member of the House Budget Committee, has said he will release yet another budget proposal, but this time with more specifics.

Though Ryan has been most critical of the deficit impact of Obama's budget, he has been unable to assess the deficit impact of his own budget. After being repeatedly asked this weekend by Bloomberg's Al Hunt about "how large" the deficit would be under the Republican plan, Ryan finally respond, "A lot."

This is only marginally better than Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), who stammered and stumbled last week when pressed on how big the deficit would be under the Republican plan.

Remember, according to Republican lawmakers, the principal criticism of the Obama administration's budget is that it runs large deficits in the short term. In response, the GOP proposes a massive tax cut for everyone earning more than $100,000, a deficit that would be "a lot," and has not (or cannot) offer any details on the proposal itself.

At the same time, we have one leading Republican senator saying the party is "working very hard" to produce a budget "with numbers" in it, while another leading Republican senator says the caucus won't bother to produce a document at all.

Can't anybody here play this game?

The GOP really didn't think this one through.

(Special thanks to Steve Benen at Washington Monthly.)

Monday, March 30, 2009


The Rethugs are trying their best to deceive the American taxpayer on President Obama's budget. I've written about this before, and now here is an article on this subject.

Instead of chopping up the article, I posted the whole thing.

From the Campaign for America's Future:

Debt, Deficits, and Deception
By Bernie Horn

Here it comes—an avalanche of misleading and mistaken “facts” about President Obama’s budget.

Last week, the House and Senate Budget Committees approved versions of the fiscal 2010 budget resolution, working from an extraordinary proposal by Barack Obama. The House version is fairly close to what the President proposed, while the Senate bill is a bit different—but still 98 percent of what the President requested. This week, the budget will come to the floor of the House and Senate, including votes on a series of amendments to slash or weaken progressive programs.

Senator Judd Gregg laid out the conservative talking points against the Obama budget during the Republicans’ Saturday radio address:

What concerns many of us are [Obama’s] proposals in the budget he recently sent to the Congress that dramatically grow the size and cost of government, and move it to the left.

It is our opinion that this plan spends too much, taxes too much, and borrows too much….

In the next five years, President Obama’s budget will double the national debt; in the next ten years it will triple the national debt….

His budget assumes the deficit will average $1 trillion dollars every year for the next 10 years and will add well over $9 trillion dollars in new debts to our children’s backs.

He is proposing the largest tax increase in history, much of it aimed at taxing small business people…and a massive new national sales tax on your electric bill…

The mud of fabrication and misinformation is so deep, we’ll have to peel it off in layers.

Huge Hypocrisy

First and foremost, conservatives are being supremely hypocritical about deficits and debt because their deficits caused the current national debt. Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts for the rich and profligate military spending tripled the national debt. George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the rich and war spending doubled the national debt. In fact, nearly 80 percent of the current debt—about which conservatives now bitterly complain—was caused by the three most recent conservative presidents: Reagan, Bush Senior, and Bush Junior.

Adding insult to injury, Republican budgets have been notorious for containing gimmicks designed to hide the full extent of their irresponsibility—the most egregious was funding the Iraq war with special appropriations outside of the budget.

This year, President Obama changed all that. His budget described a comprehensive plan covering 10 years. It included contingency funds that may or may not have to be spent. It was, quite simply, the most honest budget ever proposed.

So if you hear someone attack the Obama budget because of the deficits it honestly lays out, first say, “Where were you and your deficit-hawk arguments when George W. Bush turned Bill Clinton’s $200 billion budget surplus into a $1 trillion budget deficit?”

Revenue Ruse

Now come the three big lies about revenues. Obama is not “proposing the largest tax increase in history.” He is proposing to restore a measure of tax fairness by letting George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the rich expire next year. He is proposing to return to the tax policies that were in place during America’s great economic expansion of the late 1990s. Under the Obama program, only the rich will see their taxes increase—those with incomes over $250,000 per year. For all the rest of us, our tax rates will decline. In fact, Obama’s plan will deliver the largest middle-class tax cut in history.

Similarly, Obama’s plan is not “aimed at taxing small-business people.” This talking point is based on a fictional definition of a small businessperson invented by the Bush Administration and explained in footnote 1 of this paper. Even using that definition, less than 9 percent of Americans with small-business income make more than $250,000 a year. Only 2 percent are in the top two tax brackets. So at least 91 percent, and more likely 98 percent, of them will see no tax increase at all.

And I’ll bet you’re wondering, what is this “massive new national sales tax on your electric bill”? There is none. This is right-wing framing for the “cap-and-trade” system that experts insist is the only practical way to get a handle on global warming. This system forces companies to pay for their pollution, thereby encouraging clean, green technologies.

So to review the conservative tax trickery, the truth is that Obama’s budget delivers a substantial tax cut to 95 percent of Americans. The only ones who will see their taxes increase are the wealthy—and the corporate polluters!

Debt Double-Talk

We are currently in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Basic macroeconomics tells us that the time to cut deficits is during an economic boom. During a recession, the deficit must increase in order to save jobs and halt the downward slide.

Dean Baker explains:

In this context we are supposed to be up in arms over the deficit projections for 2013 or 2019? This is a bit like someone complaining about the lawn not being mowed at a time when the house is on fire, it’s just not the first priority. And the media all seem to go along with the charade…

The moral to this story is that the economy must take priority, not only because the state of the economy is what most directly determines people's well-being, but also because the state of the economy will be the most important determinant of the deficit.

The experience of the 1990s provides an example of exactly this sort of story. In January of 1994 the Congressional Budget Office projected that the deficit in 1999 would be $204 billion or 2.4 percent of GDP. This projection incorporated the impact of President Clinton’s tax increase and spending cuts.

It turned out that there was a surplus of $125 billion in 1999, or 1.4 percent of GDP. This shift from deficit to surplus of 3.8 percentage points of GDP (equivalent to $540 billion in 2009) was not caused by further spending cuts or tax increases; it was caused by the strong economic growth of the period.

If we spend to build the American economy, long-term deficits will go down. If we don’t spend, the recession will linger and deficits will skyrocket. It’s as simple as that.

And that brings us to the false argument that cutting the current budget is good for “our children.” If we don’t invest in our nation’s infrastructure, if we don’t restructure the pathetic economy handed down to us by George W. Bush and his conservative allies, if we don’t create a sustainable health care system, if we don’t take necessary steps to achieve energy independence and fight global warming—then we will be placing a terrible burden on our children. For them, and for us, we’ve got to change course, now.

Absurd Alternative

President Obama challenged his conservative opponents to put up their own budget proposal—or shut up.

After a great deal of hoopla, House Republicans called a press conference last Thursday to issue a 19-page document that they called an alternative budget. But the document contained no spending amounts or deficit projections. None. It’s a phony budget.

No doubt the GOP will offer one or more alternative budgets on the House and Senate floors later this week. No doubt they will be just like the alternative Republican stimulus packages in February—full of tax cuts for the rich and spending cuts for the rest of us.

The bottom line is: Conservatives caused this mess and now are running away from any responsibility for cleaning it up.

Contact Congress!

Your Senators and Representative will vote on the Budget Resolution within days. Please click here to go to a web page set up by the Campaign for America’s Future that makes it easy for you to contact your members of Congress. Tell them to stand up for Obama’s budget—and oppose all weakening amendments.


The Rethuglican Party, aka the Party of No (also read as the Party of No Plan), hates the American worker. They have proved this time and time again during the last eight years, not to mention the hatred they showed for workers during the Reagan Reign of Terror. Read a previous post titled

Once again they are trying their best to keep the American worker, and their families, down by fighting the budget that President Obama is trying to get through Congress. I'm not saying that the plan Obama has is perfect, but at least with his plan the taxes of the mega-rich go up and those of the working class go down.

Yes, some taxes will go up, but not like the Rethuglicans would like us to believe. He wants to raise the taxes of those making in excess of $250,000 per year. This is personal income. The Rethugs want us all to believe that this would ruin all small business, but I don't think there are many 'small' businessmen who have an annual income of $250,000.

This is what I found that Sen. Judd Gregg through Capitol Hill Blue:

Republicans attack Obama's budget

Attacking President Barack Obama's grand spending plans, a GOP lawmaker who almost joined the Democrat's Cabinet said Saturday the U.S. must live within its means or risk its tradition of passing a more prosperous country from one generation to the next.

"We believe you create prosperity by having an affordable government that pursues its responsibilities without excessive costs, taxes or debt," Sen. Judd Gregg said in the Republican radio and Internet address.

So, Sen. Gregg, just where the hell were you the last eight years while Bush was running our country into debt after President Clinton left office with a surplus? All that money you voted on, and passed, for the War in Iraq was never figured into the Federal budget.Did you really think we wouldn't have to pay for it eventually?

Gregg, who accepted the job as commerce secretary but then withdrew his nomination because of "irresolvable conflicts" with Obama's policies, has become one of the toughest critics of Obama's handling of the economy.

The "irresolvable conflicts" mentioned here were a difference in who should be counted in the next census. Obama wanted everyone counted, and Gregg said the homeless shouldn't be counted. I guess Gregg figures homeless people don't count as part of the population. There are a lot of working people who are homeless. This is another strike by the Rethuglicans against the American worker.

In seeking to make the GOP case, Gregg said:

_"It is the individual American who creates prosperity and good jobs, not the government."

_"We believe that you create energy independence not by sticking Americans with a brand new national sales tax on everyone's electric bill, but by expanding the production of American energy ... while also conserving more."

_"We also believe you improve everyone's health care not by nationalizing the health care system and putting the government between you and your doctor, but by assuring that every American has access to quality health insurance and choices in health care."

The Rethuglicans say they have a better plan. Go take a look at what their plan is really going to do to the American worker, both the middle class and the working poor. The good folks at Citizen’s for Tax Justice crunched the numbers (PDF) (Click the link to read their report). They conclude that a quarter of all households, most of them poor, would pay more taxes under the GOP plan, while the richest one percent would pay $100,000 less.

Of the lowest 20% of wage earners 52.4% would see their taxes go up.

Of the next 20% of wage earners 32.3% would see their taxes go up.

Of the middle 20% of wage earners 20.3% would see their taxes go up.

Of the top 1% of those who make $1,467,200 per year 0.7% would see their taxes go up. That's 7/10ths of 1 percent. That means that 98.3% of those people would pay LESS in taxes. Once again we have Reaganomics, another failed conservatard policy that taxes the poor to pay for tax breaks for the rich, being brought back by the same people who brought us the economic disaster we have now.

But yet these Rethuglican assholes say they are looking out for the American worker. To that I say BULLSHIT! they are looking out for the rich who supply them with the money to run campaigns so they can keep their cushy jobs in Congress and get more tax cuts for their rich friends, again paid for by the poor.

Any working stiff in this country who believes that the Rethuglicans are looking out for them need to have their heads examined.THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU PEOPLE!

Friday, March 27, 2009


This morning I was sitting here going through some of the blogs I follow, reading new posts that had been put up. I had the idiot box on in the background with MSNBC on. I prefer to listen to, and watch, MSNBC because they seem to be more independent then the pansy-assed suck-ups at CNN who seem to bow down to the Rethuglicans, or the propaganda arm of the Party of No at Fuck(the truth)Newz.

But I digress and must get back on track here.

While reading the previously mentioned blogs, I hear a woman talking about the how the Democrats have to cooperate with the Rethuglicans on their idea of what the budget should be. This woman, as it turns out, is a Rethuglican strategist by the name of Sheri Jacobus. I have seen her on MSNBC before, but being a Rethuglican strategist, I never really paid much attention to her. I figured she wasjust another ditto-head nut-job. Turns out I was right about that.

Anyway, she's going on and on about how the Democrats have to work with the Rethuglicans on the budget proposals they have come up with....you know, the budget proposal with no numbers in it.

At this point I start thinking about what she just said. I think now hold on there lady! For fourteen years, going back to the Clinton administration, while you Rethuglicans controlled both Houses of Congress you never ever cooperated with the Democrats on anything. The Rethuglicans ran rough-shod over everything any Democrat proposed. Lady, your Party of No wouldn't allow anything that the Democrats proposed come to a floor vote. It was the same way during St. Ronnie's reign of terror, no cooperation then, either.

During that fourteen year span of hell, the Rethuglicans acted as if they were the government and anything that was not proposed by them was no good. Well, bitch, we're all tired of your party's control of everything. Remember, you lost the election. People voted for change. It's not that the Rethuglicans were left out, they were offered a chance to work with the Democrats and they refused. All they could say was NO. So don't expect the Democrats to work with them now, they had their chance and blew it.



There's all this talk about the bonuses that were paid to the AIG executives. And well there should be, and should be much more to prevent anything like it ever happening again.

Now let's take a look at who else has benefited from the TARP legislation. Members of Congress who staunchly backed the legislation to help the poor banks and other major financial institutions who couldn't help but fuck-up the economy through the ultimate greed and lies.

I have to admit that I don't know much about Earl Pomeroy, but I do know that Steny Hoyer is a jerk who has worked to close with the Bush Whitehouse.

The other two I do know. Two of the leading members of the Party of NO. John Boehner (pronounced BONER), Mr. Orange Skin, and his wimpy little sidekick Eric Cantor who seems to be lusting after Brittney Spears...I wonder how the religious right is dealing with that.

It appears that these fools have been rewarded for their work on Tarp. They best give all of it back, or it's going to come back and bite each one of them in the ass.

(Thanks to MSNBC for the pic.)

Thursday, March 26, 2009


That fat anal-cyst drug addict woman hater has won himself an award!
Not one most guys I know would want to win.

From Raw Story:

Rush Limbaugh wins 'unsexiest' man of the year award

The man who touted 'Barack the Magic Negro' and mocked Michael J. Fox for allegedly faking Parkinson's disease has beaten out the man who stole nearly $65 billion for a dubious accolade.

Rush Limbaugh, mocked as "Jabba the Nut" by free weekly Boston Phoenix, has been selected as the ugliest man of the year by the paper. The 99 runner-up unsexiest men of the year can be viewed at this link.

"America’s ugliest moment of 2009? Rush Limbaugh, his man-boobs a-jiggle, bouncing at the CPAC podium to bask in the sickly glow of conservatism’s orgy of greed, avarice, and arrogance," the paper writes. "Here, at last, was the shining image of the 21st century Republican Party: a leeringly rich Baby Boomer squatting at the top of the mountain, reaping his jollies from the suffering of those at the bottom, praying for the failure of hope.

"If this hypocritical and morally repugnant reformed Oxy junkie wants to discuss “failure,” maybe we should talk about his career as an NFL commentator — or the last time he detoxed off prescription smack," they add.

The paper explains, "To the masses, unsexiness is defined in superficial ways — pores big enough to drive Hummers through, and hair that grows like kudzu in unwanted places, and unexplained protuberances. Think Danny Bonaduce or Carrot Top (or virtually any man you can think of with red hair). To the faceless myrmidons here at Phoenix Unsexy Headquarters, however, unsexiness is an altogether different quality, defined instead by gypping jillions out of charities or punching your girlfriend or yelling at your cinematographer."

"Our annual survey of the year’s Unsexiest Men is a corrective to this sort of deplorable behavior," the Phoenix editors write. "Assembled by a watchful team with a low tolerance for hypocrisy, wastefulness, and unfunny comedians, our list holds men accountable for their rampantly unsexy ways. Consider this list a compendium of social subpoenae from the High Court of Sexiness."

Nope, I wouldn't want to be included in that group!


The Anti-Defamation League, the propaganda arm of Israel's terrorists (my opinion), has reared it's ugly head in protest over a political cartoon by Pat Oliphant. They say it's "hideously anti-Semitic."

Here's the cartoon and what Raw Story has on this.

The latest cartoon by the most widely syndicated political cartoonist in the world has raised the
ire of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which is dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism.

The ADL's director called the syndicated cartoon, published Wednesday and reprinted below, "hideously anti-Semitic."

"Pat Oliphant's outlandish and offensive use of the Star of David in combination with Nazi-like imagery is hideously anti-Semitic," Abraham Foxman said in a statement released Wednesday. "It employs Nazi imagery by portraying Israel as a jack-booted, goose-stepping headless apparition. The implication is of an Israeli policy without a head or a heart."

As of late Wednesday, Oliphant had not responded publicly to the ADL's criticism of the cartoon.

Israel in late December launched a three-week offensive in Gaza which left over 1,300 Palestinians dead and countless of homes destroyed. The offensive was a retaliation for Palestine rocket attacks on Israeli territory. Rocket attacks from Gaza and Israeli military responses have occurred sporadically since the end of the offensive.

On Monday, a United Nations expert called called for a probe to assess if the Israeli forces could differentiate between civilian and military targets in Gaza. A U.S. State Department spokesman called that official's views "biased."

Israel thinks they can do what they want to the Palestinians and no one is supposed to say or do anything against their terrorist actions.

They have used Palestinian children as human shields along with Red Crescent ambulances and rescue workers. They have fired upon these same ambulances and rescue workers, killing several. They have harassed Palestinian fishing boats, and destroyed their nets.

Left I on the News has much more on this subject on his blog. The following are links to posts he has put up. I highly suggest you go read them and find out just what the Israelis are doing, and see what the MSM and our own government are not telling us.

The Israeli use of "human shields"
The "most moral" military
Quote of the Day
How long has this been going on?
There is no two-state solution
Harassment at sea, real and surreal
More "unhelpful" Israeli actions

It's time the rest of the world woke up and realized that the Israeli Army, Navy, Air Force and government has been committing terrorists act against the Palestinians for a long time. This must stop and the government of the United States must stop supporting Israel and it's terrorists activities.

UPDATE: Here's a little more about those radical extremists who want to murder other human beings and quote scripture verses justifying such. Click it and go read.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009


We all know that the Rethuglicans would just as soon have the poor in this country disappear.....well, at least until they need them for their own political gain.

Now we have Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) trying to pass a bill that would prevent the mobilization of the poor to use their Constitutional right to express themselves politically by voting.

From Alter Net:

GOP Rep. Defending America Against Poor Folks Getting Too Political

Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) says that her amendment to the National and Community Service Act would merely “codif[y] current regulations” on the political activities of non-profits that receive federal funding under the act. But that was just a lie. The intent of the Foxx Amendment is clear: to choke off a primary source of funding for nonprofit groups that work in poor communities -- to keep poor folks from participating in the political process. Some highlights of an analysis of the amendment by the good people over at OMB Watch (PDF):

The House amendment, offered by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), contains language that restricts Corporation for National and Community Service recipients from using an organization's private funds for lobbying; endorsing or supporting events that endorse legislation; engaging in selected nonpartisan voter activities; organizing or engaging in petitions, protests, boycotts, or strikes; providing or promoting abortions or referrals; or influencing union organizing.
For most of these activities (but not all), the organization cannot receive assistance if they “co-locate on the same premises” with an organization that does any of these activities. Finally, if an organization (or co-located organization) is indicted for voter fraud, they are ineligible for training and service funds from the Corporation for National and Community Service.

The rules in place now prohibit organizations from using federal funds to engage in any of those activities, but Foxx goes a giant step further, keeping tax dollars out of the hands of groups that use private money for political purposes -- even from non-profits that “co-locate” with organizations that engage in political activism. Of course, virtually every community organization engages in some form of advocacy on behalf of their constituents.

Of course, there are no such restrictions on the federal contractors that receive gazillions of dollars from Washington -- they can and do lobby and engage in other political activities as they please.

The intent here is not only clear, it's clearly un-American; the part about “influencing union organizing” is particularly telling.

More details from OMB Watch:

The amendment also includes restrictions on volunteers conducting voter registration drives. If this applies to the organization under the definition of “political and legislative advocacy,” this raises concerns about undermining federal laws intended to increase voter registration (e.g., Help America Vote Act and the National Voter Registration Act, commonly called the “Motor Voter Act”), creates problems for states wishing to work with nonprofits to increase voter participation, and punishes nonprofits for obeying federal and state laws that are aimed at increasing voter participation.
These restrictions on volunteers seem to also apply to a volunteer’s personal time, which, of course, raises significant constitutional issues. Presumably, the Foxx amendment would use these types of activities as definitions to determine if an organization engaged in “political or legislative advocacy.”

The part about disqualifying organizations that have been indicted -- not prosecuted -- for voter fraud is a none-too-subtle effort to flog one of the Right’s favorite bogeymen -- and the signature dog-whistle campaign of the 2008 election. According to OMB Watch, “Foxx noted that ‘ACORN employees and supervisors have been indicted for voter fraud.’”

They say a decent prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, and what Foxx failed to note was that the indictment against Acorn workers was rushed through by a notoriously partisan US Attorney just in time for the peak of the campaign season, and the organization isn't going to be convicted of any wrongdoing.

Anyway, the amendment passed in the House, but the Senate takes up the bill this week (the GIVE Act, S. 277). So, now would be a good time to call your representatives.

And the reason for not wanting the poor to vote, because there are one hell of allot more of them then there are of the rich. That would be just terrible, the country would then be run by the majority!

(Hat Tip to Joshua Holland )

Monday, March 23, 2009


There are allot of us that do it, we want it and we want it RIGHT NOW!

I think this all started during the '80's with the ME generation that Reagan and his fucked up policies fed lies to.

It's time to grow up people, IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN OVERNIGHT!


These idiots just don't get it! Here we go again, more TARP money, which is actually taxpayer dollars, being spent on luxury aircraft for the overpaid executives instead of being loaned out to stimulate the economy.

From ABC News via Buzz Flash:

JPMorgan Chase To Spend Millions on New Jets and Luxury Airport Hangar

Outraged Critics Decry the Proposal, Call For Bank To Abandon Plans

Embattled bank JPMorgan Chase, the recipient of $25 billion in TARP funds, is going ahead with a $138 million plan to buy two new luxury corporate jets and build "the premiere corporate aircraft hangar on the eastern seaboard" to house them, ABC News has learned.

The financial giant's upgrade includes nearly $120 million for two Gulfstream 650 planes and $18 million for a lavish renovation of a hangar at the Westchester Airport outside New York City.

A public hearing will be held by Westchester County officials tonight regarding JPMorgan's request for new hangar space.


The Gulfstream 650's are described by the manufacturer as the "fastest," "widest" and "most comfortable" private jet ever with superior cabin amenities, an optional stateroom, and 12 interior designs to choose from.

"It's a remarkably boneheaded decision," said corporate watchdog Nell Minow, the editor and founder of The Corporate Library, a group that provides independent corporate governance research and analysis. "It's completely tone deaf."

Yeh, they're tone deaf, to say the least. They're also stupid, arrogant, and full of themselves! These bastards don't care about you and I, or the country and the economy! They only care about themselves, they're comfort, and how much money they can rip-off the taxpayers for!

It's time to stop feeding these assholes and take back ALL the money Congress and the fucking Chimp gave them!


Sarah Palin you are a two-faced bitch!

You criticize President Obama for laughing at himself on the Tonight Show about his bowling, saying he looked like the Special Olympics. You say that was mean and uncalled for, and that he was wrong in saying that.

What about yourself, bitch?!? You refuse to take stimulus funds that are meant for education, some of which is specifically intended for special education, education for those who are physically and mentally challenged!


Palin rejects part of stimulus money

The Palin administration's budget director, Karen Rehfeld, estimates federal stimulus funds available to Alaska at about $931 million, KTUU-TV reported. Of that, Palin is requesting $515 million for capital projects and turning away about $177 million in education funds.

Rep. Les Gara, D-Anchorage says that it's irresponsible for the governor to reject federal education funds, KTUU-TV reported, especially in a state with one the highest drop-out rates in the nation.

"We will request federal stimulus funds for capital projects that will create new jobs and expand the economy," Gov. Palin said in a written statement. "We won’t be bound by federal strings in exchange for dollars....."

So, you think the education of all children in Alaska isn't important enough to take Federal funds.
You're worried about strings being attached, heh, that's a good one. Your state already receives more Federal tax dollars than all but one or two other states. You don't seem to be worried about strings being attached to that money.

Here's a thought, Moosebreath, why don't you just take tax dollars 1 for 1, your state sends in one dollar in Federal taxes and you get one back. Then maybe those extra tax dollars can go to the states that are sending in more than they are getting back. There, problem solved!


Well it finally happened. Alaska has been waiting and watching and now the wait is over. Mount Redoubt, one of those volcanoes Bobby 'The Boob' Jindal said didn't need to be monitored with Stimulus Funds, has finally erupted.

From the Associated Press via Yahoo News:

This March 15, 2009, photo released by the Alaska Volcano Observatory ...

Alaska volcano Mount Redoubt erupts 4 times

ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Alaska's Mount Redoubt volcano erupted four times overnight, sending an ash plume more than 9 miles high into the air, but the state's largest city has likely been spared from any ashfall.

"The ash cloud went to 50,000 feet, and it's currently drifting toward the north, northeast," said Janet Schaefer, a geologist with the Alaska Volcano Observatory.

The first eruption occurred at 10:38 p.m. on Sunday night and the fourth happened at 1:39 a.m. Monday, according to the observatory.

The current wind patterns are taking the ash cloud away from Anchorage and instead heading toward Willow and Talkneetna, two communities near Mount McKinley, North America's largest mountain in Denali National Park.

Geophysicist John Power said no cities have yet reported any ash fall from the volcano, but noted that it's still early.

Using radar and satellite technology, the National Weather Service is predicting ash to start falling later Monday morning.

Dave Stricklan, a hydrometeorogical technician with the National Weather Service, expected very fine ash

"Just kind of a light dusting," he said. He said the significant amount of ash probably dropped immediately, right down the side of the volcano.

"The heavier stuff drops out very quickly, and then the other stuff filters out. There's going to be a very fine amount of it that's going to be suspended in the atmosphere for quite some time, but nothing to really affect anything such as aviation travel. The heavier stuff will filter out," he said.

The 10,200-foot Redoubt Volcano, roughly 100 miles southwest of Anchorage, last erupted during a four-month period from 1989-90.

But the volcano became restless earlier this year. The observatory had warned in late January that an eruption could occur at any time.

Increased earthquake activity over the past 48 hours prompted scientists to raise the alert level for Mount Redoubt on Sunday.

On Sunday morning, 40 to 50 earthquakes were being recorded every hour.

A steam plume rising about 1,000 feet above the mountain peak was observed Saturday.

Hey Bobby, ya wanna go to Alaska and explain to those people why it is that they don't need volcano monitoring?

Sunday, March 22, 2009



Iraq, six years of war. A war that should have never been. Remembering the lies that got us here.

From Truthout columnist William Rivers Pitt:


For the record, 2,192 days later, this is how we got here:

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." - Dick Cheney, Vice President
Speech to VFW National Convention

"There is already a mountain of evidence that Saddam Hussein is gathering weapons for the purpose of using them. And adding additional information is like adding a foot to Mount Everest." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Response to Question From the Press

"We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." - Condoleezza Rice, US National Security Adviser
CNN Late Edition

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons." - George W. Bush, President
Speech to the UN General Assembly

"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons. We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons - the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have." - George W. Bush, President
Radio Address

"The Iraqi regime ... possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas." - George W. Bush, President
Cincinnati, Ohio, Speech

"And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons." - George W. Bush, President
Cincinnati, Ohio, Speech

"After 11 years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon." - George W. Bush, President
Cincinnati, Ohio, Speech

"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas." - George W. Bush, President
Cincinnati, Ohio, Speech

"Iraq, despite UN sanctions, maintains an aggressive program to rebuild the infrastructure for its nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile programs. In each instance, Iraq's procurement agents are actively working to obtain both weapons-specific and dual-use materials and technologies critical to their rebuilding and expansion efforts, using front companies and whatever illicit means are at hand." - John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control
Speech to the Hudson Institute

"Iraq could decide on any given day to provide biological or chemical weapons to a terrorist group or to individual terrorists ... The war on terror will not be won until Iraq is completely and verifiably deprived of weapons of mass destruction." - Dick Cheney, Vice President
Denver, Address to the Air National Guard

"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing

"The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Response to Question From the Press

"We know for a fact that there are weapons there." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." - George W. Bush, President
State of the Union Address

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent." - George W. Bush, President
State of the Union Address

"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Remarks to the UN Security Council

"There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more. And he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction. If biological weapons seem too terrible to contemplate, chemical weapons are equally chilling." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Address to the UN Security Council

"In Iraq, a dictator is building and hiding weapons that could enable him to dominate the Middle East and intimidate the civilized world - and we will not allow it." - George W. Bush, President
Speech to the American Enterprise Institute

"If Iraq had disarmed itself, gotten rid of its weapons of mass destruction over the past 12 years, or over the last several months since (UN Resolution) 1441 was enacted, we would not be facing the crisis that we now have before us ... But the suggestion that we are doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and rearrange all of its pieces is not correct." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Interview With Radio France International

"So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think our judgment has to be clearly not." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Remarks to the UN Security Council

"Let's talk about the nuclear proposition for a minute. We know that based on intelligence, that has been very, very good at hiding these kinds of efforts. He's had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." - Dick Cheney, Vice President
"Meet the Press"

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." - George W. Bush, President
Address to the Nation

"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly ... all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing

"One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites." - Victoria Clark, Pentagon Spokeswoman
Press Briefing

"I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction." - Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board Member
Washington Post, p. A27

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
ABC Interview

"We still need to find and secure Iraq's weapons of mass destruction facilities and secure Iraq's borders so we can prevent the flow of weapons of mass destruction materials and senior regime officials out of the country." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Conference

"You bet we're concerned about it. And one of the reasons it's important is because the nexus between terrorist states with weapons of mass destruction ... and terrorist groups - networks - is a critical link. And the thought that ... some of those materials could leave the country and in the hands of terrorist networks would be a very unhappy prospect. So it is important to us to see that that doesn't happen." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Conference

"I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing

"But make no mistake - as I said earlier - we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing

"Were not going to find anything until we find people who tell us where the things are. And we have that very high on our priority list, to find the people who know. And when we do, then well learn precisely where things were and what was done." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
"Meet the Press"

"We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them." - George W. Bush, President
NBC Interview

"There are people who in large measure have information that we need ... so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Briefing

"We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so." - George W. Bush, President
Remarks to Reporters

"I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Remarks to Reporters

"We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Fox News Interview

"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein - because he had a weapons program." - George W. Bush, President
Remarks to Reporters

"U.S. officials never expected that 'we were going to open garages and find' weapons of mass destruction." - Condoleezza Rice, US National Security Adviser
Reuters Interview

"We said all along that we will never get to the bottom of the Iraqi WMD program simply by going and searching specific sites, that you'd have to be able to get people who know about the programs to talk to you." - Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Interview With Australian Broadcasting

"It's going to take time to find them, but we know he had them. And whether he destroyed them, moved them or hid them, we're going to find out the truth. One thing is for certain: Saddam Hussein no longer threatens America with weapons of mass destruction." - George W. Bush, President
Speech at a Weapons Factory in Ohio

"They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations

"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on." - Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Vanity Fair Interview

"The President is indeed satisfied with the intelligence that he received. And I think that's borne out by the fact that, just as Secretary Powell described at the United Nations, we have found the bio trucks that can be used only for the purpose of producing biological weapons. That's proof-perfect that the intelligence in that regard was right on target." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing

"We have teams of people that are out looking. They've investigated a number of sites. And within the last week or two, they have in fact captured and have in custody two of the mobile trailers that Secretary Powell talked about at the United Nations as being biological weapons laboratories." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Infinity Radio Interview

"But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." - George W. Bush, President
Interview With TVP Poland

"You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons ... They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two ... And we'll find more weapons as time goes on." - George W. Bush, President
Press Briefing

"This wasn't material I was making up, it came from the intelligence community." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Press Briefing

"We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents. This is the man who spent decades hiding tools of mass murder. He knew the inspectors were looking for them. You know better than me he's got a big country in which to hide them. We're on the look. We'll reveal the truth." - George W. Bush, President
Camp Sayliya, Qatar

"I would put before you Exhibit A, the mobile biological labs that we have found. People are saying, 'Well, are they truly mobile biological labs?' Yes, they are. And the DCI, George Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, stands behind that assessment." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Fox News Interview

"No one ever said that we knew precisely where all of these agents were, where they were stored." - Condoleezza Rice, US National Security Adviser
"Meet the Press"

"What the president has said is because it's been the long-standing view of numerous people, not only in this country, not only in this administration, but around the world, including at the United Nations, who came to those conclusions ... And the president is not going to engage in the rewriting of history that others may be trying to engage in." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Response to Question From the Press

"Iraq had a weapons program ... Intelligence throughout the decade showed they had a weapons program. I am absolutely convinced with time we'll find out they did have a weapons program." - George W. Bush, President
Comment to Reporters

"The biological weapons labs that we believe strongly are biological weapons labs, we didn't find any biological weapons with those labs. But should that give us any comfort? Not at all. Those were labs that could produce biological weapons whenever Saddam Hussein might have wanted to have a biological weapons inventory." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Associated Press Interview

"My personal view is that their intelligence has been, I'm sure, imperfect, but good. In other words, I think the intelligence was correct in general, and that you always will find out precisely what it was once you get on the ground and have a chance to talk to people and explore it, and I think that will happen." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Briefing

"I have reason, every reason, to believe that the intelligence that we were operating off was correct and that we will, in fact, find weapons or evidence of weapons, programs, that are conclusive. But that's just a matter of time ... It's now less than eight weeks since the end of major combat in Iraq and I believe that patience will prove to be a virtue." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Pentagon Media Briefing

MS. BLOCK: There were no toxins found in those trailers.

SECRETARY POWELL: Which could mean one of several things: one, they hadn't been used yet to develop toxins; or, secondly, they had been sterilized so thoroughly that there is no residual left. It may well be that they hadn't been used yet. - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
"All Things Considered" Interview

"That was the concern we had with Saddam Hussein. Not only did he have weapons - and we'll uncover not only his weapons but all of his weapons programs - he never lost the intent to have these kinds of weapons." - Colin Powell, Secretary of State
"All Things Considered" Interview

"I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are." - Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing

How much longer must we stay, Mr. President, how much longer?

Saturday, March 21, 2009


Ronald Reagan, the asshole who thought it was best to take from the poor and give to the rich.
You think I wrong? Read on and you'll see what I'm talking about.

From Truthout:

Reagan: The Great American Socialist
by: Ravi Batra

Socialism has been much in the news for some months. Recently, some GOP stalwarts charged President Obama with preaching the heresy. John Boehner, the House minority leader, characterized Obama's stimulus package as, "one big down payment on a new American socialist experiment."

"Socialism" is a pejorative term in American politics and needs to be carefully examined. It usually refers to increased government control over the economy, or policies that promote the redistribution of wealth.
.......Obama's plans will transfer wealth from the rich to the poor, whereas Reagan's bills transferred wealth from the poor and the middle class to the opulent. In fact, Obama's measures are puny, whereas Reagan's were massive. If the Democrat is a "small" socialist, Reagan was the Great American Socialist.

Let's go back to the early 1980's. In 1981, Reagan signed a law that sharply reduced the income tax for the wealthiest Americans and corporations. The president asserted his program would create jobs, purge inflation and, get this, trim the budget deficit.

Well we all knew that wouldn't work and didn't work, so he carried on with the rape of the working class and the poor.

In 1986, Reagan slashed the top tax rate further. His redistributionist obsession led to a perversity in the law. The wealthiest faced a 28 percent tax rate, while those with lower incomes faced a 33 percent rate; in addition, the bottom rate climbed from 11 percent to 15 percent. For the first time in history, the top rate fell and the bottom rate rose simultaneously. Even unemployment compensation was not spared. The jobless had to pay income tax on their benefits. A year later, the man who would not spare unemployment compensation from taxation called for a cut in the capital gains tax. Thus, Reagan was a staunch socialist, totally committed to his cause of wealth redistribution towards the affluent.

How much wealth transfer has occurred through Reagan's policies? At least $3 trillion.

The Social Security hike generated over $2 trillion in surplus between 1984 and 2007, and if it had been properly invested, say, in AAA corporate bonds it could have earned another trillion by now. At present, the fund is empty, because it has been used up to finance the federal deficits resulting from frequent cuts in income tax rates. If this is not redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich, what else is?

Thus, Reagan was the first Republican socialist - and a great one, because his wealth transfer occurred on a massive scale.

This is where it all started, the destruction of an affluent middle class. The spiral downward has continued til today. The Reagan Revolution brought this about, with the help of the neocons and the Reagan Democrats who turned their backs on the rest of the working class and the poor.


Once again, Newt Gingrich has reared his ugly religious head. And once again he's trying to force his beliefs down our throats. I can't speak for anyone else, and don't pretend to, but I don't need something forced on me that I do not believe.

From Alter Net:

Zombie Newt Gingrich Wants More Brains, er Religion

Newt Gingrich's career is like the stubbornest zombie in all the land. What will it take to kill this thing—a silver bullet? A stake? A machete? A Molotov cocktail to the undead head? Somebody just tell me, so we can kill his stumbling, blue-faced, boil-crusted, shredded clothes-wearing, incoherently gurgling, and BRAINS!-craving career once and for all and get on with our lives.


Gingrich has launched an organization devoted to bringing conservative evangelicals and Catholics into the political process and to strengthening the frayed alliance between economic and religious conservatives. Called Renewing American Leadership, the group is led by Gingrich's longtime communications director and includes some of the country's top conservative Christian activists on its board.

..."In the last few years I've decided that we're in a crisis in which the secular state, if allowed, will fundamentally and radically change America against the wishes of most Americans," Gingrich said in a phone interview on Thursday. "You've had such rising hostility to religious belief that I wanted to reach broadly into the country and dramatically raise public awareness of threats to religious liberty."

Blah blah blah religious victims blah blah blah. Hilariously,

US News and World Report

is currently running in the sidebar next to this story a public poll asking: "President Obama is opening many of his public events with prayers from local community leaders. Do you support this new White House tradition?" to which 59.86% of respondents have answered yes. Oh, the hostility!

Perspective: We've got a Christian president who's just as Christiany (even if it's a different flavor) as the last guy, who had an almost unanimously Christian administration which relentlessly pandered to conservative Christians, including nominating three openly Christian justices to the Supreme Court (two of whom made it to the bench), an almost entirely Christian Congress who start each session with a prayer, guaranteed freedom of religion, money that says "In God We Trust," a pledge of allegiance that describes us as "one nation under God," television networks who will accept advertising from conservative religious groups but not liberal political groups, schools who are incorporating a religious belief into science classes, gays being denied marriage in order to protect its "sanctity," conscience clauses for pharmacists and healthcare
providers, religion-based residential communities being built, Museums of Creationism springing up, laws still on the books that respect Christians' holy day (like in Indiana, where you still can't shop for a car or buy booze on a Sunday), churches not required to pay taxes, Christmas recognized as a national holiday, and on and on and on.

Anyone who looks at the American landscape and sees "threats to religious liberty" is fucking delusional.

Fuck OFF, Gingrich—and take your manufactured martyr complex with you.

(Hat Tip to Melissa McEwan at Shakesville )

There's a whole lot more from US News and World Report at the link below.

Newt Gingrich, Culture Warrior?

At a time when many religious conservatives say the Republican Party is ignoring their issues and taking their support for granted, former House speaker and GOP idea man Newt Gingrich is turning his attention to the concerns of conservative Christians like never before.

Like Melissa said above, our country and our society are dominated by Christianity. They say they want their freedom of religion, when what they really want to do is force what they believe upon everyone else whether they want it or not.

They can have they religious beliefs, that's fine with me. I want my freedom from their religion! The Constitution says the government will not make preference of one religion over another, but that has been going on for quite some time. In God We Trust on money printed by the Federal Government, and One Nation Under God in the Pledge of Allegiance proves that the Federal Government itself is shredding the Constitution.

It's time for this to change. I am so sick and tired of religion being thrown in my face everywhere I go. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

Friday, March 20, 2009


Well....poor Bernie Madoff has to stay in prison. Waaaa.....ain't that just too fucking bad!
The judges figured that there was too much of a chance the bastard would skate.

From Associated Press via Yahoo News:

Appeals court rules Bernard Madoff must stay in prison

NEW YORK – Disgraced financier Bernard Madoff will remain in prison until he is sentenced in one of the largest financial frauds in history.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday backed a lower court ruling a day after hearing arguments from a lawyer for the 70-year-old former Nasdaq chairman who sought Madoff's release from jail. The government argued against freeing him.

The appeals court said U.S. District Judge Denny Chin was correct when he sent Madoff to prison last week immediately after Madoff confessed that he had defrauded thousands of investors of billions of dollars for at least two decades. Investors who had trusted him were outraged that until then, Madoff had been confined to his penthouse apartment since his December arrest.

Chin had cited Madoff's age and said the possibility of life in prison heightened his incentive to flee. Madoff faces up to 150 years in prison at sentencing, scheduled for June 16.

"The defendant's age and his exposure to imprisonment are undisputed, and the court did not err in inferring an incentive to flee from these facts," the three-judge panel wrote.

"Moreover, the district court's finding that the defendant has the means — and therefore the ability — to flee are not clear error. The defendant has argued that all of his assets are accounted for and are inaccessible to him; however, the district court was not required to treat this defendant's financial representations as reliable," the judges said in the four-page ruling.

Bye-bye Bernie, hope ya have a 'good time' in prison. You should be happy nobody else got to you before the Feds did....'cause ya probably wouldn't have made it to prison if they had.

(em mine)


The Chimp's lawyer, the fascist John Yoo, is now blaming his ruined reputation on leftists and hippies. Like it's our fault he was an idiot when he told Bush he could ignore the Constitution!

From Truthout via Alter Net:

Torture Memo Author John Yoo Blames Ruined Reputation on "Hippies, Protesters and Left-wing Activists"

John Yoo doesn't have any regrets about the controversial legal opinions he wrote for the White House -- many of which were later withdrawn and repudiated -- that gave former President George W. Bush unfettered and unchecked power in the aftermath of 9/11.

In a little known interview with the Orange County Register, published March 3, Yoo said he doesn't "think he would have made the basic decisions differently."

No regrets, but you would have done things differently. Is that right?!

"These memos I wrote were not for public consumption," Yoo told the OC Register.

So...you figured no one else would see them?

"......You really have decisions to make, which you could spend years on. Sometimes what we forget as private citizens, or scholars, or students or journalists for sure (he laughs), is that in hindsight, it's easier to say, 'Here's what I would have done.' But when you're in the government, at the time you make the decision, you don't have that kind of luxury."

In other words, you don't have the luxury of following what the Constitution says.

Yoo is the author of one of the most infamous legal memos to ever come out of the DOJ: an August 2002 legal opinion widely referred to as the "torture memo," which gave the Bush administration the legal justification to subject terrorist detainees to harsh interrogations, such as the drowning technique known as waterboarding, in violation of the Geneva Conventions and international and domestic laws against torture.

Yoo..... asserted that the president had unlimited powers to prosecute the "war on terror" on American soil and could ignore constitutional rights, including First Amendment freedoms of speech and the press and Fourth Amendment requirements for search warrants.

In perhaps the most controversial of the memos, dated October 23, 2001, and entitled "Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the United States," Yoo said Bush's war powers allowed him to put restrictions on freedom of the press and freedom of speech.

"First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully," Yoo wrote. "The current campaign against terrorism may require even broader exercises of federal power domestically.

This, you idiot, is what ruined your reputation! It wasn't the hippies, or protesters, or Left-wing activists, it was your own stupid fascist arrogance that caused your reputation to be ruined. You ass, you arrogant fucking ass, the Founding Fathers wouldn't have stood for this kind of crap out of you. I had uncles who fought in WWII to prevent assholes like you from destroying this great country, and you told that idiot Bush that he could take away our rights! Fuck you! You shouldn't even have a license to practice law, and you damn sure shouldn't be teaching it.

(Hat tip to Jason Leopold for the article.)

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Wednesday, March 18, 2009


This is really fucked up! Pope Rat-Nazi the First says Catholics on the African Continent can't use condoms 'cause they don't prevent HIV/AIDS, they spread it! Has he no brains at all!?

And people wonder why I have so much against organized religion!

From Alter Net:

The Pope: Condoms Make AIDS Worse

Yet another shining testament to the relevance of organized religion in modern life....

.....en route to Africa (the place with the highest rate of HIV transmission in the world) the Pope (the guy who only recently caught flak for lifting the excommunication of a Holocaust denier) said the following:

"You can't resolve [AIDS] with the distribution of condoms ... On the contrary, it increases the problem."


I get that the Catholic Church wants people to breed (or abstain) and that condoms stand in the way of that. It’s not surprising that Church leaders wouldn’t be the most vocal proponents of condom use and distribution (though they should be). But seriously? To produce such a qoutable, memorable sound-bite on the issue? In a place where gender inequities and social stigma and a lack of resources already stack the deck against condom use, and put people at the highest risk of HIV transmission in the world????

The AP notes that many nuns and priests who actually work with people living with AIDS “question the church’s opposition to condoms amid the pandemic ravaging Africa.”

But, those guys actually spend time with people who have the disease, instead of traipsing around the world doing photo ops and saying insane things. What do they know?

This church 'leader' is supposed to be concerned about his 'flock'? Sure the fuck doesn't look like it to me.

I wonder....what would Jesus do?

(Hat Tip to Tana Ganeva)


Federal prosecutors have charged Bernie Madoff's longtime accountant with fraud, so when are they going to charge Bernie's wife!? Hell, she worked in Bernie's office, and she can't tell me she didn't know about the ponzi scheme!
*Note to self: Don't hold breath on this one, either.

From the Associated Press via Yahoo News:

Prosecutors charge Madoff's accountant with fraud

NEW YORK – Bernard Madoff's longtime accountant was arrested on fraud charges Wednesday, accused of aiding the man who has admitted cheating thousands of investors out of billions of dollars in the past two decades.

The charges against David Friehling, 49, come as federal authorities turn their attention to those who they believe helped Madoff fool 4,800 investors into thinking that their longtime investments were growing comfortably each year.

Friehling ran an accounting office in a nondescript suburban building north of New York City, and quickly drew scrutiny. Experts in accounting said it would be preposterous for such a tiny firm to audit properly an operation the size of Madoff's.

He had served as Madoff's auditor from 1991 through 2008 while he worked as the sole practitioner at Friehling & Horowitz. He was paid a tidy sum by Madoff: Prosecutors said he made between $12,000 and $14,500 a month from 2004 to 2007. That works out to $144,000 to $174,000 a year.

Friehling faces up to 105 years in prison if he is convicted. He is charged with securities fraud, aiding and abetting investment adviser fraud and four counts of filing false audit reports with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.


Acting U.S. Attorney Lev L. Dassin said in a release that Friehling is not charged with knowing about Madoff's Ponzi scheme.

However, Dassin said: "Mr. Friehling's deception helped foster the illusion that Mr. Madoff legitimately invested his clients' money."


The SEC accused Friehling of lying to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants for years, denying he conducted any audit work, because he was afraid that his work for Madoff would be subject to peer review.

Prosecutors said that as far back as 1995, Friehling failed to maintain professional independence from Madoff. They said he or his wife had an account with Madoff that exceeded $500,000, the maximum amount under SEC rules that an auditor can invest with a client and still maintain independence.

The strain of the Madoff scandal on Friehling began to show in recent months as he put his luxury home in Rockland County on the market.

A listing posted on the Web site of Prudential Rand Real Estate said the family is seeking $995,000 for the five-bedroom Colonial. The home was built in 1990 and has a swimming pool and 4,437 square feet of space.

I think the Feds should seize that five-bedroom Colonial. I'm sure there are people who feel they should benefit from the sale of that home.