"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." Theodore Roosevelt
And as to the allegation of hyprocisy exceeding partisanship, that is partisan-shit. You can find info on who received how much from Jack Abramoff here, and a nice spreadsheet with a couple of sort options here. I copied and pasted that spreadsheet myself to do a little additional analysis - just basic stuff mind you.
Jack spread the jack all over town, but let's be specific. There are 197 Republican recipients on that list, 99 Democrats - a two to one ratio. The Repugs received $2.58 million, the Dems $1.12 million - again a two to one ratio. Now, if the ratios of numbers in Congress were 2:1 that would be more or less equal per capita donations on each side. But those numbers in Congress aren't 2:1. They are much closer to 1:1.
And guess what? 20 Dems received over $10k, 45 Republicans did. The largest donation to any Dem recipient? A hair under $300k, while the largest to a Repug recipient was $450k. See a pattern? A ratio roughly approaching 2:1 no matter how you slice it. Makes me wonder what the plan was behind it all.
George 'TWAT' Bush hasn't given two shits about the people in Darfur since he was a Viet Nam deserter. In fact, the Chimperor still thinks 'darfur' is whatcha call the hairy stuff on his little dog. But this week that seems to have changed.
Following by TWO DAYS on the UN Human Rights Commission condemnation of our little torture and interrogation prison in Guantanamo, George discovers Darfur as a theatre in the war on terror, and calls for more troops.
"The strategy was to encourage African Union troops to try to bring some sense of security to these poor people that are being herded out of their villages and terribly mistreated," Bush told a friendly, invitation-only audience of about 500 inside a Port of Tampa cruise ship terminal.
"Terribly mistreated"? Yeah, I'd say that shot in the back as you run from mounted gunmen while carrying your child away is mistreated all right. So why, George of the Jungle, did it take you six years to notice?
Oh, that's right. Sudan, where Darfur is located, is on the UN Human Rights Council. (An oxymoron in itself, given THAT member.) So the idea is that you want to mess with Sudan's genocide program because they're messing with yours, is that it? "Don't mess with me or you're gonna get trouble", huh George? Paybacks are a bitch, and you're going to teach them that, is that it?
C'mon, mr. pResident, let's talk 'truthiness' here. You never gave a crap about the people in Darfur and you don't now. You're only using it as a political play to get even with the UN. We know it, and so does every thinking person on earth - which may be why your audience was 'invitation only' - so you could sort out the thinking people and keep them away.
While George Bush still lives in a fantasy world where the earth doesn't get any warmer as a result of human activities and heat pollution, the ice sheet in Greenland is disappearing faster than scientists previously thought. Much faster. And presumably, so is the Antarctic ice and the polar (north) ice sheet.
The comprehensive analysis found that the amount of ice dumped into the Atlantic Ocean has doubled in the last five years.
If the Greenland ice sheet melted completely, it would raise global sea levels by about 7m.
Greenland's contribution to global sea level rise today is two to three times greater than it was in 1996.
And that's just Greenland. This earth is going to get a lot more crowded when the oceans rise by some 21 feet. Just imagine how little dirt will be left when all the ice melts.
Well folks, its' been another bang-up week for our Chimperor Bonzo. Here's my little summary. Please do fill in whatever you think I may have missed.
We start off with our VP Dick "Torture" Cheney shooting his hunting partner, and hiding the fact from the public and his boss, and the associated lies. It's like a microcosm of the GOP Middle East policy - trigger happy liars ignoring any collateral damages they might do and then lying about the entire thing. He was finally forced (did Bush actually TELL Cheney to do this?) to admit it on TV. At some point Cheney said that he'd tried to hide the incident because he knew it would get out and he 'didn't have a press person' there. So in the absence of a paid liar, Jabba the Dick decided to say nothing. Of course, there are still a lot of questions about the story and the the details that were already refuted.
In the arena of illegal domestic spying, a federal judge has ordered the administration to produce the required documentation for a lawsuit over the issue. Senator Rockefeller picks up on the issue of whether or not NSA is spying outside of their legal authority. And the Busheviks make a deal with Senator Pat Roberts (who announced it). They painted it as "stopped the investigation" to make it look like a 'win' for the dirty-white White House, but in fact it's an attempt to avoid a Constitutional showdown with Congress over the issue. Bush was trying to steamroll them and the public on this, and it didn't go down as hoped - he was headed for impeachment over it and would NOT have won. So they came up with this deal to 'provide legal oversight' on the spying, in hopes of diverting the impeachment direction and of keeping up the spying. How else are you going to keep tabs on everybody who disagrees with you?
So, although it was pretty much all presented with a softball attitude, I think it all adds up to bad news for Bush. And THIS is only since my posting of the Bad News news at half-time on Wednesday. Overall, I'd say it's another bad week for Bush, and that my people is a good week for America.
I noticed this story about Diane Wilson, who was jailed as a result of a protest at a Cheney speech. It's a fair example of how dissenters are treated by this administration.
Be sure to click thru to the letter she sent to the sheriff, or just click here for it. It's amazing that people are still treated this way in America. Civil rights apparently only exist outside of a jail house. Remember that, Jack, Tom, Scooter, Karl, Dick and George. You're all going to see the inside pretty soon.
Over on Salon, Peter Daou shreds the myth of the 'liberal media'. And he's providing examples of how the media really has a Right-Wing bias, choosing words to soft-pedal the bad news for the administration, removing things from on-line postings, etc. For example:
++ ISSUE: Cheney shooting incident --- NARRATIVE: Bush strong, Dems weak --- EXAMPLE: CNN's Bruce Morton used the VP's shooting to repeat the tired GOP spin that Republicans are tougher than Democrats, and specifically tougher than war hero John Kerry. Morton commented that Bush and Cheney are avid hunters, and contrasted the observation with 2004 Bush campaign talking points by saying Sen. John Kerry "spent time posing with guns" two years ago, and that "voters probably saw more of him pursuing exotic sports, windsurfing and so on." The truth is Kerry has been hunting since the age of 12. As Media Matters points out, "Morton's jab echoed language Cheney used during the 2004 campaign to attack Kerry as effete and elitist."
++ ISSUE: Cheney shooting incident --- NARRATIVE: Bush and Cheney are infallible --- EXAMPLE: Jane Hamsher notes that CBS News ran a provocative news item on Monday, explaining that "Texas authorities are complaining that the Secret Service barred them from speaking to Cheney after the incident." For reasons that are still unexplained, CBS has scrubbed the report from its website without explanation.
As I recall, it was Lyndon Johnson's administration who first labeled the media 'left-wing' and 'liberal', because the anti-war movement was strong and got coverage. America didn't like the Viet Nam fiasco and the newspapers and TV reported that. (Yes, kiddies, there was once a time without the internet....) And Johnson's administration labeled them all as 'liberals' because they opposed the Viet Nam war.
The label has stuck, although modern right-wing whack jobs no longer even know what "liberal" really means. One of them wrote my local paper last week complaining about the "liberal fascists". Um, the Fascists were and are in favor of total control of the state and it's citizens by the government. To them you're no more than a tool of production to be used for the benefit of the state (which is thedictator and totalitarian government in power). So how can you have a "liberal fascist"? Correct answer - NOT POSSIBLE. The first word implies freedoms, the second implies totalitarianism - polar opposites.
So, check it out. Then find your own examples of the Right-wing Bias, and link them here. I will periodically collect and post them, and you and your friends can find some more and link them on that post, and so on. Let's become warriors against the right-wing bias in the MSM, and expose their Bush suck-up reporting.
According to one of the three former associates, frequently Abramoff's cell phone would ring and the lobbyist would tell the associate that the White House was calling. To prove that he wasn't making up what he was telling the associate, Abramoff occasionally would hold up the phone so that the associate could see the incoming call was indeed a White House phone number.
Howard Dean is taking on the White House and calling for Cheney's resignation if in fact it is determined that he instructed Scooter Libby to leak confidential information for political purposes. I don't know why it wouldn't be, as Libby has supposedly already told this to the prosecutors. My question is if Cheney ordered the leaking of national secrets, why settle for resignation? Shouldn't he be prosecuted?
And now there is a Republican Congressman, Peter Hoekstra, saying that the illegal domestic spying program may be of no value because of the news about it. But not because Bush essentially told the Congress and the nation that he was in charge, he was going to do this and we could all go fuck ourselves if we didn't like it. No, Hoekstra is still defending Bush on this one - it's only valueless because Al-Qaeda will have already changed their tactics. However, Bush is now challenging Congress and the Constitution over an issue that is bankrupt.
Meantime, Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the eavesdropping program should not continue "unabated without any review."
The intelligence committees of Congress should demand to know, in secret session, what the administration is doing, said Biden. He said he supports a proposal by the committee chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., to have the FISA court review the eavesdropping program and decide whether it is legal.
"We cannot say to a president, 'Mr. President, whatever you want to do, under any circumstances, tap anything, and you don't even have to tell us what you're doing.' That is bizarre," Biden said on ABC's "This Week."
This is turning into a bad week for the Bushies as well, and Katrina may be thanked for it.
Victims are being turned out of their hotels, while the trailers supposed to provide homes for them sit by the thousands in 'holding' areas. And as soon as Michael Brown finished testifying to Congress, Chertoff comes up with a big reforms package for DHS. Why did he have to be slapped in the face with Brown's testimony before he decided something needed to change? And since his reforms package is apparently a response to Brown's testimony two days earlier, how well thought through can the reforms be?
Overall, the House report said, the federal government's response to Katrina was marked by "fecklessness, flailing and organizational paralysis."
"Our investigation revealed that Katrina was a national failure, an abdication of the most solemn obligation to provide for the common welfare," said a summary of the scathing report obtained Sunday by The Associated Press.
"I reject outright the suggestion that President Bush was anything less than fully involved," said White House homeland security adviser Frances Fragos Townsend.
'Scuse me, Franny, but wasn't he on vacation drying out in Crawford? Didn't it take him like, 4 days, to get to New Orleans to see what was going on? And if Bush was fully involved, then Bush is to blame because he's 'the boss' who's management was a total failure.
Well, at least a group of Senators is sounding off on the matter, not all of them Democrats, and none of them happy about what they heard last week. So maybe we'll have another bad week for Bush. And that will be a good week for America.
So Bush is giving his cronies a $7 Billion windfall profit, but you can be damned sure it won't be taxed. All that will happen is that the extra cash will go to line the pockets of Bush, Cheney and their Carlyle Group cronies. That easy $7 Billion will NOT reduce the cost of your heating oil, nor the price of gas at the pump either.
But we will be paying for this for decades, along with Bush's ego-wars, while we have to whittle away through higher taxes in the future at the deficit that Bush has created from a surplus just 5 years ago. Isn't it funny how what's good for Bush is bad for America?
One more once, the White House tries to stick it to our veterans by cutting any benefits they might be getting. Saying that they are trying to make sure our veterans get the benefits they deserve, the Bush administration is cutting those benefits in yet another program.
Does it sound like Bush thinks the vets don't deserve benefits to you? It sure does to me.
By now you've all heard about Torturosaurus Dick Cheney shooting his friend and hunting partner because a quail came between them. And you've heard the bit about the old guy having a heart attack from a disloged pellet in his heart. So, just to be sure you're not news deprived, here is my selection for the summary.
Questions here about the delay in revealing the shooting. That subject is still not addressed, in spite of the hard time Scott McClellan got at the Monday press gaggle, regardless of his best lies and evasions. And even more questions brought up in this video from Countdown. (Sorry that link isn't direct, you'll have to click on the video link for "Duck, it's Dick" because I haven't learnt as yet how to post the direct to the video link.) Questions like, why drive this guy further to a country hospital than the short distance to the city hospital? If Whittington dies, could Cheney be charged with Negligent Homicide? And others.
Meanwhile, there is some humor to be found in it all, here, and on Amazon. And Cheney will do a damage control liar's interview on TV, to be found on FOX of course. Cheney doing an interview? Must be some serious shit still covered up if he's getting pushed into the public eye like that. I wonder what Whittington did to deserve a personal blast from the VP? He's allegedly tied to Abramoff, but that by itself shouldn't warrant a personally delivered blast in the face.
What a reflection on Cheney's attitude toward the world, eh? In such a hurry to pull the trigger on his target that he can't see the collateral damage it will cause. Reminiscent of his and Bush's attempts to dominate the world by force like Iraq, isn't it? And, in a reflection on the pursuit of Osama - there's no word on the quail, so it apparently escaped. Dick will no doubt say "I'm not concerned about the quail, I don't think about the quail, I'm busy protecting the people". HA