Links of the Day - November 23, 2007

A few links to cheer up your Black Friday:

In the Beginning

Post Thanksgiving Humor

EPIC Newsletter 14.23

High Crimes and Misdemeanors - Treason is not old news

I was not planning on writing much today, but then came across the article below from the Huffington Post.

I realize there is a large amount of bitterness and overall displeasure with the way their lives have been disrupted, but Valerie Plame-Wilson and Joseph Wilson make some very good points about how out of touch the main stream media seems to be and where there priorities seem to be in today's issues. It is a sad fact, that no one in Washington seems to be asking deep questions. The fact that have been a lot of shenanigans within this admnistration and a very low public approval rating, should be a perfect storm to sell a lot of newspapers by covering these types of issues. They ask two very good questions at the end of this piece,

Where is the outrage? Where is the "contempt and anger?"

But I guess I am just too idealistic at time to think other should feel the same

"I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors." George Herbert Walker Bush, CIA dedication ceremony, April 26, 1999.

When Bush administration officials I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Karl Rove, Richard Armitage and Ari Fleischer betrayed Valerie Plame Wilson's identity as a covert CIA operations officer, they fell into the category of "the most insidious of traitors." Now we learn from the president's former press secretary, Scott McClellan, that the president himself "was involved" in sending him out to lie to the American public about the betrayal. If his direction to McClellan was deliberate and knowing, then the president was party to a conspiracy by senior administration officials to defraud the public. If that isn't a high crime and misdemeanor then we don't know what is. And if the president was merely an unwitting accomplice, then who lied to him? What is he doing to punish the person who misled the president to abuse his office? And why is that person still working in the executive branch? Special Prosecutor
Patrick Fitzgerald made clear his suspicions about the culprit when he said "a cloud remains over the office of the vice president." But we may never know exactly what happened because President Bush thwarted justice and guaranteed the success of the cover-up when he commuted Scooter Libby's felony sentence on four counts of lying, perjury and obstruction of justice.

With the exception of MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, and the intrepid David Shuster, the mainstream media would have you believe that McClellan's revelation is old news. "Now back to Aruba and the two-year old disappearance of a blond teenager." But treason is not old news. The Washington press corps, whose pretension is to report and interpret events objectively, has been compromised in this matter as evidence presented in the courtroom demonstrated. Prominent journalists acted as witting agents of Rove, Libby and Armitage and covered up this serious breach of U.S. national security rather than doing their duty as journalists to report it to the public.

So far there is no apparent desire for redemption driving the press to report on the treachery of senior officials. Instead, the mainstream press has compounded its complicity by giving the Bush administration yet another free pass and shifting blame. The New York Times failed to publish an article on McClellan's revelation and The Washington Post buried it at the end of a column deep on page A-15 in the newspaper. Earlier in the week, Newsweek magazine, owned by the Washington Post Company, proudly announced the identity of its new star columnist -- Karl Rove, one of the key actors in this collective treason. Robert Novak, who willfully disclosed Valerie's identity, having been twice warned not to do so by the CIA, and who transmitted his column to Rove before it was published, remains a regularly featured columnist in The Washington Post.

With nearly 70 percent of the public now believing that our country is on the wrong track, it is no wonder that many feel let down by major institutions, including the Washington press establishment that increasingly resembles the corrupt Soviet propaganda mill. One reporter from a major news organization even asked whether McClellan's statement wasn't just "another Wilson publicity stunt." Try following this tortuous logic: Dick Cheney runs an operation involving senior White House officials designed to betray the identity of a covert CIA officer and the press responds by trying to prove that the Wilsons are publicity seekers. What ever happened to reporting the news? Welcome to Through the Looking Glass.

Fearful of its access to the powerful, and defensive about its status in the high school social culture that permeates the capital of the Free World, much of the press has forgotten its responsibility to the public and the Constitution.

Presidents and those who aspired to be president in the past once took strong positions in defense of U.S. national security. Today, Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson has tried to build his support through fronting for the Scooter Libby Defense fundraising efforts. Meanwhile, other Republican candidates accuse Patrick Fitzgerald of being "a runaway prosecutor" and remain silent about the stain on Bush's presidency.

Where is the outrage? Where is the "contempt and anger?"

Happy Thanksgiving with the best TV moment ever

I came across this at tvsquad and it reminded me what funny television is all about. Give it a watch, and remember to tell folks and family what you are thankful for this weekend.

Rep Christopher Shays Newsletter - Nov 14, 2007

From Chris Shay's Newsletter

Improving Health Care Options for Children: SCHIP/CHIPRA
I support passing a meaningful expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) so fewer of our society's most vulnerable individuals will have access to health insurance. For that reason, I have voted four times in favor of reauthorizing the program.
I was one of five House Republicans to vote for H.R. 3162, which passed the House by a vote of 225 to 204 in early August. I then voted for H.R. 976, the conference report, which passed the House by a vote of 265 to 159 but was subsequently vetoed by the President. On October 18, I voted to override the President’s veto, but the motion to override, which needed a majority of two-thirds to pass, failed by a vote of 273 to 156. Because of the failure to override the veto, I voted for new legislation H.R. 3963, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA), which passed the House by a vote of 265 to 142. This bill was a slightly modified version of the conference report and addressed specific concerns of opponents, such as illegal immigration.

Click here for more information about my vote
Return to top

Working Toward a Bipartisan Solution to Iraq
I want to do everything possible to help our mission succeed and bring most of our troops home.
In October, I voted for H.R. 3087, which will require the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress within 60 days a report on the status of planning for the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq. This legislation was similar to a bill I introduced back in March, which would require the President to set dates for the beginning and completion of a phased redeployment of our troops from Iraq.

In September, I joined 27 other members of the House of Representatives in unveiling a “Bipartisan Compact on Iraq Debate,” a series of eight principles to help guide the House away from political infighting and toward a bipartisan solution on Iraq. Among these principles are a commitment to end the partisan fighting within Congress over the conflict in Iraq and commit immediately to a truly bipartisan dialogue; and require a safe and responsible redeployment of U.S. Armed Forces transitioning the combat mission over to the Iraqi forces.

Click here to learn more about my work on Iraq

Return to top

Reviewing the Condition of Long Island Sound
As a Co-Chair of the Congressional Long Island Sound Caucus, I joined Co-Chair Congressman Steve Israel in launching a “Congressional State of the Sound Study” on October 6 with two forums, one in Centerport, New York and another at the Norwalk Maritime Aquarium.

Click here for more information on the hearings

Return to top

Extending the Current Moratorium on Internet Taxation
I voted for H.R. 3678, the Internet Tax Freedom Act Amendments Act, when it passed the House on October 16. The legislation extends the current moratorium on Internet taxation for four years. Subsequently, the Senate passed legislation to extend the moratorium for seven years, which the President signed into law on October 31.

Click here to read my statement on the House passed bill
Return to top

Discussing Energy Conservation with Energy Secretary Bodman
U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman visited Fairfield University on October 22 for a ribbon cutting event at the University’s new combined heat and power plant.
Secretary Bodman and I then toured the UBS trading floor in Stamford and I hosted a roundtable discussion in conjunction with the Business Council of Fairfield County on business and municipal conservation efforts, and plans to establish an Energy Improvement District in Stamford.

While we are making improvements, I believe our policy should reduce demand for oil by emphasizing conservation, and promoting the use of alternative and renewable energy sources.
I have introduced energy legislation, H.R. 1945, the Energy for Our Future Act, which has three principal goals for our national energy policy: improving the fuel efficiency of passenger vehicles, incentivizing the purchase of energy-efficient appliances and repealing extraneous tax breaks for the fossil fuel industries that are very profitable and have plenty of incentive to develop additional supply.

Protecting our environment and promoting energy independence are two of the most important jobs I have as a Member of Congress. We simply won’t have a world to live in if we continue our neglectful ways.

Click here for more information on the visit
Return to top

Supporting Budget Earmark Transparency
On September 24, I signed a discharge petition, H.Res. 559, in an effort to force a vote allowing all earmarks to be challenged and debated on the House floor. While I believe securing federal funding for local projects can be an important role for a Member of Congress, it is also important this funding meet basic requirements and be transparent. I believe members should disclose not only the earmarks they received but the earmarks they requested and I am one of the few Members of Congress to do so.

Please visit click here for a list of my earmark requests
Return to top

Offering Alternatives to FAA Airspace Redesign
Congressman Scott Garrett (R-NJ) and I offered an amendment on September 20 to H.R. 2881, the FAA Reauthorization Act, to require the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to investigate the possibility of utilizing market-based strategies for air congestion reduction as an alternative to the FAA Airspace Redesign plan. The amendment, which is designed to evaluate the FAA’s claim that the airspace redesign is the only solution to reduce congestion at these airports, passed the House by voice vote.
I also am grateful for the efforts by Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and Governor Jodi Rell to join several towns in challenging the proposed redesign. If we want to succeed, it is going to take everyone at the local, state and federal level working together.

Click here to learn more about my amendment

Creating Affordable Housing
I voted for H.R. 2895, the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act, which passed the House on October 10 by a vote of 264 to 148. This legislation would create a new federal housing program known as the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund to be administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The purpose of the fund is to provide funding for the construction, rehabilitation and preservation of affordable housing for low-income and very low-income families.

Click here to read my statement for the record
Return to top

Assessing Long Term Threats, Risks and the U.S. Strategy and Security in a Post-9/11 World
On October 10 the National Security and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee, of which I am the Ranking Member, held a hearing entitled, "Six Years Later: Assessing Long Term Threats, Risks and the U.S. Strategy and Security in a Post-9/11 World.”
This is the first in a series of hearings the Subcommittee plans to hold on the subject of the United States National Security Strategy. In this first hearing, we examined the current strategy and explored possible alternatives.

Click here for more information on the hearing
Return to top

Testifying in Support of Weir Farm
On October 30, I testified before the House Natural Resources Committee in support of H.R. 1836, the Weir Farm National Historic Site Amendment Act. This bill would enable the National Park Service to move the Weir Farm administrative facility to the Georgetown Wire Mill site in Redding, Connecticut. Weir Farm commemorates the work of American Impressionist J. Alden Weir, and other well-known artists who painted at his summer home.

Click here to read my testimony
Return to top

Preventing Homegrown Terrorism
I voted for H.R. 1955, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, when it passed the House Tuesday by a vote of 404 to 6 on October 25. The legislation creates a 10-member National Commission, modeled after the 9/11 Commission, to study the roots of homegrown terrorism in the United States.

Click here to read my statement for the record
Return to top

Establishing an ALS (Lou Gehrig’s Disease) Registry
I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 2295, the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) Registry Act, which passed the House on October 16 by a vote of 411 to 3. This legislation would establish a national ALS registry to collect data in hopes of finding a cure for this disease.
We have all seen the effect ALS has had on individuals affected by this terrible disease. One young mother in particular, whose sister interned in my office, has been an enormous inspiration to me and so many others as she fights to combat this debilitating illness, and I am grateful for her courage and strength.

Click here to read my statement for the record
Return to top

Assisting Seniors with Medicare Open Enrollment
As the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Plan open enrollment period of November 15 to December 31, 2007 approaches, my staff is available to answer any questions seniors may have.
Seniors or their families can contact my office at the following phone numbers or via email by clicking here.

Bridgeport. 203/579-5870
Norwalk ..........866-6469
Stamford .........357-8277
Ridgefield ........438-5953
Shelton ............402-0426

A time to remember the Veterans

This is a reprint from 2005

Veterans Deserve our Deepest Respect -

"As time marches forward, we rise again to mark our nation's reverent bservance of Veterans' Day; the 87th anniversary of the Armistice ending the carnage of World War I on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918.

"This year, as in years past, our nation finds itself at war. Young men and women, volunteers in the uniform of our armed forces, continue their unbroken legacy of service to our nation; a service conceived during the revolutionary cause of our forebearers."

A Holiday for Heroes - Here is a pretty good summary of why we celebrate Veterans Day today, something we should never forget. It is our responsibility to hold our government accountable for the actions of the military, not the other way around. Whatever your feelings are about the current "War" in Iraq and Afghanistan lets salute our military personnel today and remember all those that have served and given so much of themselves to help keep us all free today.

Links of the Day - November 8, 2007

The Immoral Religious Right - To the People

They simply care more about killing brown people than they do reducing the size of government. What is shocking is that so many so-called Christian conservatives put a higher value on killing foreigners than they do on banning abortion and stopping gay marriage.

We defend the constitution to Protect our Country - Chris Dodd

"The United States abides by the laws of war....Wanton killing, torture, cruelty, or the workings of unusual hardship on enemy prisoners or populations is not justified under any circumstances. Likewise respect for the reign of law...is expected to follow the flag wherever it goes."

George Marshall spoke those words in the middle of last century; but they could have been spoken at any time in our history.

The Impeachement of Dick Cheney - Bob Cesca

After all, one year ago yesterday, we elected the Democrats in overwhelming numbers to amplify our screaming voices to a decibel loud enough to penetrate the unchecked corridors of power in Washington -- we hired this party to speak for us and to use this expressed authority to end the war and to hold this historically unpopular executive regime accountable.

To date and with the exception of some admirable investigations by a few standout lawmakers, the Democrats have done nothing to make good on their mandate from you and me.

Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Cheney -

We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that, among these, are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the government; and, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.

These words from the Declaration of Independence are instructive at this moment. Because not only whenever any form of government, but whenever any government official becomes destructive of the founding purposes, that official or those officials must be held accountable.

Partners in the War on Terrorism - John D. Rockefeller IV

In the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, the Bush administration had a choice: Aggressively pursue potential terrorists using existing laws or devise new, secret intelligence programs in uncharted legal waters.

Unfortunately, President Bush often chose the latter, and the legitimacy and effectiveness of our efforts to fight terrorism were dramatically undermined.

The ignored mulitudes of the libertarian lite

I found this while trolling the news at the San Diego Union Tribune. They really sum up the way I am feeling. Out of touch with the two major parties, and the other fringe parties are too extreme to actually develop a real following. Why won't a candidate come out and support what I believe in? Let me know what you think, if any candidate will ever address these needs.

There is a huge group of Americans who have no comfortable home in either major party: the tens of millions of us who are fiscal conservatives skeptical of government -- people who will never warm to Dems -- but also a group which is deeply uncomfortable with religious conservatives' sway over the GOP and which doesn't like the authoritarian streak in the Bush administration.

I really believe a libertarian lite could be the first third-party candidate to win a state since George Wallace in 1968. I don't think it will be Ron Paul in 2008 (though he would have a shot in Alaska); Paul is a pretty hard-core libertarian. But a rich candidate who sounded like Arnold, circa 2003-2005, would be hugely attractive in a three-way race with a Hillary-style Dem and a GOPer who sees gays as a menace and civil liberties as a nuisance.

Links of the Day - November 6, 2007

Uneffected by Bad Marketing - Lewis Green

The truth: I am unaffected by bad marketing, which I think is best represented
by much of today's advertising.

Law and Order: Bollywood - John Ross Bowie

the studios can't outsource writers jobs they way Chrysler might auto worker
jobs. That said, what if they did start writing, say, Without A Trace in New
Delhi? 4 hour episodes? Musical numbers? I don't hate the idea

Writers Strike takes Sanity off the Air - Jen Clark (great points here)

...they (sic. the writers on strike) are hurting our country by taking these particular shows off-the-air. As sad a statement as this is, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Jay Leno, David Letterman, Conan O'Brien and Craig Ferguson are almost always better sources for perspective than our cable TV news programs and their hosts. The interviews conducted by the late-night guys, especially Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, are usually of smart people and consist of conversations, as opposed to shouting matches between know-it-alls.

Its Hard to be a Democrat - Nora Ephron

It's hard when you watch a debate and decide that in the end you're probably
going to throw your vote away in the primary and vote for someone who doesn't
have a chance, like Dennis Kucinich. I mean, look at them, look at the front
runners: Hillary Clinton, who can't help being Hillary Clinton; Barack Obama,
who was a disappointment from the beginning and whose new-found attack mode is
as dispiriting as his low energy level used to be; John Edwards, whom I am
afraid I will never be able to think of again (after this week's Peggy Noonan
column in the Wall Street Journal) as anything but a desperate furry little
woodland animal.

Noun + Verb + 9/11 + Iran = Democrats’ Defeat? - By Frank Rich

WHEN President Bush started making noises about World War III, he only confirmed what has been a Democratic article of faith all year: Between now and Election Day he and Dick Cheney, cheered on by the mob of neocon dead-enders, are going to bomb Iran.

But what happens if President Bush does not bomb Iran? That is good news for the world, but potentially terrible news for the Democrats. If we do go to war in Iran, the election will indeed be a referendum on the results, which the Republican Party will own no matter whom it nominates for president. But if we don’t, the Democratic standard-bearer will have to take a clear stand on the defining issue of the race. As we saw once again at Tuesday night’s debate, the front-runner, Hillary Clinton, does not have one.

Libertarian Opinion courtesy of Time Magazine

A few weeks back, Michael Kinsley wrote an essay for Time Magazine called Libertarians Rising.
I found the points he made about libertarians and communatarians quite intrigueing, since this sounds more like a reasonable ideological debate, rather than just putting the GOP up against the Dem's and seeing what ideas sticks to which party.

I would love to see more people step up and declare themselves as libertarians as I have (and those quoted below) or as communitarians, rather than sticking strictly with traditional party labels. This will at least allow some flexibility in how we are viewed and perceived.

Here are some of the letters that were published in response to this essay. I found them all interesting to see other libertarians out there coming at this issue from different directions. It really makes me feel that this movement, perhaps with Ron Paul at the forefront, might be beginning to make some serious waves in 2008. I have emphasized some points, I find interesting:

Michael Kinsley began his essay "Libertarians Rising" by offering what he called an oversimplified contrast: Democrats are for Big Government, whereas Republicans are against it. But both parties are for Big Government; they merely differ on how to use it. Democrats would legislate compassion. Republicans would legislate morality. Libertarians would legislate neither. That is the difference in a nutshell. - Mark Hanley, SKAMANIA, WASH.

Kinsley implied that Libertarians emphasize the individual over society. We all need bread from the baker, meat from the butcher and family and friends for support and fellowship. All of this occurs spontaneously, without government's managing it. Yes, a limited government is needed to defend liberty and property, but this only creates the framework in which free people create society. Kinsley equates government with society, and that's what separates statists from libertarians. - Mark Gibb, LEAGUE CITY, TEXAS

Kinsley portrayed Libertarians as self-centered isolationists. Libertarians believe the government should trade and interact with other nations freely but not make alliances. And they do care about other countries--they just don't believe that U.S. citizens' tax dollars should be spent on other nations. If individuals want to help other countries voluntarily, that's their right. Other than those points, it was a good article. Thanks for giving Ron Paul more exposure. Ryan McDonald, MANKATO, MINN.

Libertarianism is on the rise because the Democratic and Republican parties have been grotesquely distorted by their misguided leaders. The Libertarian Party is attractive because Democrats want to create a nanny state and Republicans want to extend the U.S. empire to the Middle East. The Libertarian Party should change its name to the Liberationist Party, because of its efforts to free Americans from the corrupted Democrats and Republicans. H. Ann Tackett, - FULLERTON, CALIF.

Mischaracterizing Libertarians as "against government in all its manifestations" simply alienates people. I know many constitutionalist libertarians who by definition support and love the idea of limited government for certain purposes, as specified in the Constitution. How could we love the Constitution and be against government in all its manifestations? My wife and I are active members of the community, so the idea that we are against community is completely wrong. We are against coercive policies enforced in the name of community. How could you call an act of giving charity if it was not done by choice? Ben Orona, - NEW PORT RICHEY, FLA.

Here is full Kinsley essay:

To oversimplify: Democrats are for Big Government; Republicans are against it.

To oversimplify somewhat less, Democrats aren't always for Big Government, and Republicans aren't always against it. Democrats treasure civil liberties, whereas Republicans are more tolerant of government censorship to protect children from pornography, or of wiretapping to catch a criminal, or of torture in the war against terrorism. War in general and Iraq in particular--certainly Big Government exercises--are projects Republicans tend to be more enthusiastic about. Likewise the criminal process: Republicans tend to want to make more things illegal and to send more people to jail for longer. Republicans also consider themselves more concerned about the moral tone of the country, and they are more disposed toward using the government in trying to improve it. In particular, Republicans think religion needs more help from society, through the government, while Democrats are touchier about the separation of church and state.

Many people feel that neither party offers a coherent set of principles that they can agree with. For them, the choice is whether you believe in Big Government or you don't. And if you don't, you call yourself a libertarian. Libertarians are against government in all its manifestations. Domestically, they are against social-welfare programs. They favor self-reliance (as they see it) over Big Government spending. Internationally, they are isolationists. Like George Washington, they loathe "foreign entanglements," and they think the rest of the world can go to hell without America's help. They don't care--or at least they don't think the government should care--about what people are reading, thinking, drinking, smoking or doing in bed. And what is the opposite of libertarianism? Libertarians would say fascism. But in the American political context, it is something infinitely milder that calls itself communitarianism. The term is not as familiar, and communitarians are far less organized as a movement than libertarians, ironically enough. But in general communitarians emphasize society rather than the individual and believe that group responsibilities (to family, community, nation, the globe) should trump individual rights.

The relationship of these two ways of thinking to the two established parties is peculiar. Republicans are far more likely to identify themselves as libertarians and to vilify the government in the abstract. And yet Republicans have a clearer vision of what constitutes a good society and a well-run planet and are quicker to try to impose this vision on the rest of us. Now that the Republican Party is in trouble, critics are advising it to free itself of the religious right on issues like abortion and gay rights. That is, the party should become less communitarian and more libertarian. With Democrats, it's the other way around.

Very few Democrats self-identify as libertarians, but they are in fact much more likely to have a live-and-let-live attitude toward the lesbian couple next door or the Islamofascist dictator halfway around the world. And every time the Democrats lose an election, critics scold that they must put less emphasis on the sterile rights of individuals and more emphasis on responsibilities to society. That is, they should become less libertarian and more communitarian. Usually this boils down to advocating mandatory so-called voluntary national service by people younger than whoever is doing the advocating.

Libertarians and communitarians (to continue this unjustified generalizing) are different character types. Communitarians tend to be bossy, boring and self-important, if they're not being oversweetened and touchy-feely. Libertarians, by contrast, are not the selfish monsters you might expect. They are earnest and impractical--eager to corner you with their plan for using old refrigerators to reverse global warming or solving the traffic mess by privatizing stoplights. And if you disagree, they're fine with that. It's a free country.

The chance of the two political parties realigning so conveniently is slim. But the party that does well in the future will be the one that makes the better guess about where to place its bets. My money's on the libertarians. People were shocked a couple of weeks ago when Ron Paul--one of those mysterious Republicans who seem to be running for President because everyone needs a hobby--raised $5 million from July through September, mostly on the Internet. Paul is a libertarian. In fact, he was the Libertarian Party presidential candidate in 1988. The computer revolution has bred a generation of smart loners, many of them rich and some of them complacently Darwinian, convinced that they don't need society--nor should anyone else. They are going to be an increasingly powerful force in politics.

Who ya gonna call?

I found this over at BraveHumans:

I came across a new image in the fight against terrorism. Meet the new logo from
the CIA. The Terror Busters: One can’t help but notice the similarity to the old Ghostbusters logo:

When I first saw the TerrorBusters logo, I thought it was a joke. But the above
image comes straight from the CIA website. It is real.

Here is my question, where did they get the model for this terrorist? It looks like something straight out of Munich in 1972 or Patty Hearst robbing a bank circa 1974/1975.
Whoever the ad genius that came up with this logo was certainly not trying to be up to date or politically correct.

Now the more fundamental question is how much time, money and effort was put into creating this logo by the CIA? Dont we think they should spending this time, money and effort torturing (I mean finding) bad guys and uncovering conspiracy’s and terrorist networks, rather than paying some ad agency to make their terror busters more appealing with a logo that does in deed remind me of Ghostbusters?

Remember Remember the Fifth of November

Nursery Rhyme & History

Guy Fawkes & the Gunpowder PlotWords of "Remember Remember" refer to Guy Fawkes with origins in 17th century English history. On the 5th November 1605 Guy Fawkes was caught in the cellars of the Houses of Parliament with several dozen barrels of gunpowder. Guy Fawkes was subsequently tried as a traitor with his co-conspirators for plotting against the government. He was tried by Judge Popham who came to London specifically for the trial from his country manor Littlecote House in Hungerford, Gloucestershire. Fawkes was sentenced to death and the form of the execution was one of the most horrendous ever practised (hung ,drawn and quartered) which reflected the serious nature of the crime of treason.


The Tradition begins...


The following year in 1606 it became an annual custom for the King and Parliament to commission a sermon to commemorate the event. Lancelot Andrewes delivered the first of many Gunpowder Plot Sermons. This practice, together with the nursery rhyme, ensured that this crime would never be forgotten! Hence the words " Remember , remember the 5th of November" The poem is sometimes referred to as 'Please to remember the fifth of November'. It serves as a warning to each new generation that treason will never be forgotten. In England the 5th of November is still commemorated each year with fireworks and bonfires culminating with the burning of effigies of Guy Fawkes (the guy). The 'guys' are made by children by filling old clothes with crumpled newspapers to look like a man. Tradition allows British children to display their 'guys' to passers-by and asking for " A penny for the guy".

The picture is of the 'Gunpowder Plot' conspiratorsStarting with Thomas Bates, Robert Wintour, Christopher Wright, John Wright, Thomas Percy, Guy Fawkes, Robert Catesby and Thomas Wintour

Remember Remember poem

Remember remember the fifth of November

Gunpowder, treason and plot.

I see no reason why gunpowder, treason

Should ever be forgot...

Pardon our Torture

Here is an editorial I read this morning by Eric Mink, from the St. Louis Post Dispatch, where he discusses some reasons how we got into the torture pickle, we currently find ourselves. I thought this was a good follow-up to my post on Friday. It is a bit lengthy, but gives a good explanation on how Congress is not doing their job of checking the balance of the executive branch. Something we should all be demanding now and especially in 2008.

He sums it pretty well in the first few paragraphs:

In his new book, "The Terror Presidency," conservative legal scholar Jack Goldsmith recalls something David Addington told him about the exercise of presidential power. Goldsmith was in the midst of a turbulent, eight-month tenure as head of the Office of Legal Counsel in the Bush Justice Department, the person responsible for determining the legality of proposed or ongoing administration actions.

Addington, legal counsel to Vice President Dick Cheney at the time, told Goldsmith, "We're going to push and push and push until some larger force makes us stop."

If it is possible to crystallize in a sentence the lawless methodology of the lawless Bush administration, Addington's sentence does so. Whether ignoring bipartisan environmental statutes, defying duly ratified treaties, feigning compliance with court decisions, staining the honor of the military justice system, stonewalling congressional subpoenas, allowing incompetents to despoil government departments with impunity or trampling on the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and 14th Amendments to the Constitution, the Bush administration has pushed, pushed and pushed, and then continued pushing....

That depends, to use the rhetorical construction of a previous president trying to hide illicit sexual conduct, on what the definition of "torture" is. And the confirmation of federal judge Michael Mukasey, Bush's choice to succeed the duplicitous Alberto Gonzales as attorney general, now may depend on whether Mukasey continues to play along.

On July 20, Bush issued an executive order declaring that "a program of detention and interrogation operated by the Central Intelligence Agency" is consistent with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. But he could not have declared otherwise.

As ratified treaties, the Geneva Conventions are the law of the land. Their terms regarding the treatment of soldiers and civilians in times of war have long since been translated into federal criminal statutes. And on June 29, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that, contrary to the administration's claim, Common Article 3 applies to prisoners held by the United States in connection with the war on terrorism.

But the administration's record on torture strips the executive order, as well as the president's public comments, of credibility.
On Aug. 1, 2002, Justice Department lawyer John Yoo concocted a legal analysis deconstructing the meaning of the word "severe" in ways that gave the administration's stamp of approval to virtually any treatment of prisoners short of dismemberment and burning alive. U.S. interrogators were permitted to use a wide range of torturous actions, including a near-drowning technique called "waterboarding," to extract confessions and information, at least some of which later proved demonstrably false.

When Jack Goldsmith took over the Office of Legal Counsel in October 2003, he began examining some of its recent opinions. He soon withdrew Yoo's torture memo, and it was replaced on Dec. 30, 2004, with a new legal opinion that clearly and forcefully repudiated the use of any such tactics as a matter of American law.

Then the Addington push principle went to work. Four weeks ago, The New York Times revealed that in 2005, after Goldsmith left government, the Office of Legal Counsel had issued new memos reauthorizing tactics and combinations of tactics that any reasonable person outside the sway of the Bush/Cheney/Addington axis would recognize as torture.

The military justice establishment, badly shaken by the revelations of prisoner abuses in Afghanistan and Iraq and at Guantanamo, did not go along. A new Army Field Manual covering interrogations, issued in 2006, returned to the principled, humane treatment of prisoners that had been the military's proud tradition and a model for the world. The FBI, likewise, has taken steps to distance its personnel from abusive interrogations.

In contrast, Bush's dubious executive order of July applies to interrogations conducted by the CIA. These presumably include interrogations of prisoners held off the books in secret prisons scattered around the world — prisons that the president once made a point of saying had been emptied. Subsequent reporting indicated they have been repopulated.

In his confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill two weeks ago, Mukasey had no trouble condemning torture but claimed he didn't know enough about waterboarding to know if it meets the definition of the term. Late last week, all 10 Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote to Mukasey saying that their votes on his appointment depend on whether he agrees that it does.

The Cheney/Addington never-relent methodology is the perfect vehicle for Bush's we're-on-a-mission ideology. If the cause is unassailable, then any tactic may be justified, rationalized and perpetuated.

Indeed, the combination is very much in play today in the White House's fast-shuffle dealings with Congress over secret spying programs, foreign and domestic, that the administration has been conducting without warrants since shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The programs ignored an on-the-books law designed to make sure our government could detect threats to national security without abusing its power. They were devised without input from Congress and without the knowledge of the judges of the special court empowered to authorize secret U.S. spying operations. White House officials didn't even fully inform then-Attorney General John Ashcroft about some aspects of the programs, and wouldn't let the general counsel of the agency conducting the programs — the National Security Agency — see the internal legal opinions that supposedly justified them.

The warrantless spying went on for four years before The New York Times exposed the administration's illegal conduct in December 2005. Forced to confirm the story, Bush claimed the program involved communications only between people in the United States and suspected terrorists abroad. He was dodging; in May 2006, USA Today revealed that some telecommunications companies had been giving government spies access to the domestic call records and e-mails of millions of Americans — also without warrants. Now the administration wants to grant legal amnesty to the companies that cooperated.

What is most dangerous about the Bush administration's reckless disregard for law is that it is the very embodiment of moral relativism. Indeed, without the certain foundation of the rule of law, moral footing becomes exceedingly slippery.

In an Oct. 21 speech to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, for example, Vice President Cheney referred approvingly to statements by historian Bernard Lewis about Middle East policies during the Cold War. "If you did anything to annoy the Russians," Cheney said, quoting from a Lewis piece for The Wall Street Journal, "punishment would be swift and dire. If you said or did anything against the Americans, not only would there be no punishment; there might even be some possibility of reward."

So the vice president of the United States regards the Soviet Union as a role model for the conduct of foreign policy.

As a deputy attorney general under John Ashcroft for two years in the Bush administration, James Comey recognized these dangers all too well. It was Comey who headed off a late-night effort by senior White House officials to get a hospitalized Ashcroft to certify a spying program as legal.

"It can be very very hard to be a conscientious attorney working in the intelligence community," he told the staff of the National Security Agency at Fort Meade, Md., in a speech on May 20, 2005. "At the outset, we [lawyers] know that the rule of law sets this nation apart and is its foundation," he said.

"The lawyer is the custodian of so much . . . most importantly of all, the custodian of our Constitution and the rule of law. . . . It takes far more than a sharp legal mind to say 'no' when it matters most. It takes moral character. . . . It takes an understanding that, in the long run, intelligence under law is the only sustainable intelligence in this country."

Hot Stove Baseball Thoughts

Congrats to the Boston Red Sox on winning their 2nd world series in 4 years. They were the best team this year and deserve to win. My only concern is that I picked them to win in 5. I feel bad that the Rockies had to wait 9 days between games. I am guessing with a little less of a layoff, they might have been a bit more competitive, but the better team prevailed in the end.

Alex Rodriguez and Scott Boras, have to be the most arrogant and egotistical combination of player and agent ever. First they upstage the World Series by saying Arod is opting out of his contract during Game 4 of the World Series, before the 10 day waiting period had even begun. They demonstrated that they believe Rodriguez is more important than any other aspect of the game. Whether Boras demanded $350 million to simply come to the table with Yankees or not, (which if true is simply ridiculous) they could have given them at least a few of those 10 days, rather than opting out before the season is over. But I am sure this was a cold calculated PR move to get us talking about Arod (I know, they succeeded). Yeah sure Boras issued the perfunctory apologize but it is still pretty sleazy, and I certainly did not see any contrition with the apology. It seemed like just another tactic in their marketing campaign

Once again, this means Rodriguez and Boras simply cannot be taken at face value, and are proven liars. I only hope that whatever team ultimately winds up paying them $300 Million winds up putting themselves in such a hole (2001 rangers anyone?) that they cannot compete for 10 years and A-rod is mired in the cellar again. He better not say anything about wanting to win, since only the Yankees and Red Sox are willing to pay every year to win, and should just admit it is about the money. Then the ultimate ballsy move by Boras wasss to invite the Yankees back to the table after they shunned and essentially embarrassed the new Yankee brain trust. Kudos to Hank Steinbrenner for telling him to piss off.

I hope the new Yankee management stays true to their and stays out of the negotiations unless they go in to simply drive his price up, and send another team in to the tank for the next 10 years. That would be sweet revenge.

They new Yankee brain trust definitely punted the Joe Torre situation. The appearance is they never wanted him back. I am in the camp that change is inevitable. Although the Yankees were the best team from June to September, they failed to respond in October for the third straight season. In order to avoid becoming the Atlanta Braves or the Buffalo Bills made a bold decision to make a change why they still have most of there core. They handled the whole process atrociously, but I have no objections to changing managers after 12 years. I support Joe Girardi, he has experience and will bring a different voice to the clubhouse. Now they need to focus on getting Mariano Rivera and Jorge Posada re-signed. Doing that should convince Andy Pettite to come back in 2008.

Does Curt Schilling really address any of the Mets needs? This is essentially the Tom Glavine signing a few years ago all over again. Lets sign an aging superstar in order to stabilize the rotation. Glavine might have been above average at best during his years in Queens. Curt Schilling is on the downside of his career and will not provide stability and long term solution that the Mets need to avoid another September collapse. It will be interesting in seeing how hard they pursue Schilling. Rumors say they are also interested in Jorge Posada (good for the Mets if they get him, bad for the Yankees) and maybe the aforementioned Arod, though do you want David Wright playing 2b or 1b?

GWB: Prophet or Heretic?

President George W. Bush is either more brilliant and prophetic than any of can ever comprehend or simply a moron, from the International Herald Tribune. Comparing the entire Congressional Democrats to the German Reistag circa 1933 or to war torn Russia in 1918 is pretty harsh under any circumstances. How exactly is that conciliatory, in an effort to work together to make our country a better place? Very sad!

President George W. Bush compared Congress' Democratic leaders Thursday to people who ignored the rise of Lenin and Hitler early in the last century, saying "the world paid a terrible price" then and risks similar consequences for inaction today.

Bush accused Congress of stalling important pieces of the fight to prevent new terrorist attacks by: dragging out and possibly jeopardizing confirmation of
Michael Mukasey as U.S. attorney general, a key part of his national security team; failing to act on a bill governing eavesdropping on terrorist suspects; and moving too slowly to approve spending measures for the Iraq war, Pentagon and veterans programs.

"Unfortunately, on too many issues, some in Congress are behaving as if America is not at war," Bush said during a speech at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. "This is no time for Congress to weaken the Department of Justice by denying it a strong and effective leader. ... It's no time for Congress to weaken our ability to intercept information from terrorists about potential attacks on the United States of America. And this is no time for Congress to hold back vital funding for our troops as they fight al-Qaida terrorists and radicals in Afghanistan and Iraq."

Torture - Why is this even an issue?

Why have the republicans elected to national office or running for national office feel that torture is alright under some circumstances?

Am I the only person left in the country who believes that this practice, in any way shape or form is just wrong?

Can you imagine one of our American Generals, or civilian leaders from the pentagon being dragged in irons to the Hague and tries for crimes against humanity?

How can the nominee for Attorney General, claim that waterboarding is not torture?

What is wrong with this picture? How did we get here? Isn't this something you expect from our enemies of the past? Communist Russia? Nazi Germany?

Let my opinion on this subject be crystal clear:

THIS IS NOT DONE IN THE UNITED STATES AND SHOULD NOT BE DONE BY ANY AMERICAN CITIZEN UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES

Wife's night out?

(Editor's note: This did not happen to me or my wife, this is one of those things that got sent to me, the proverbial urban legend, and I thought it was pretty damn funny)

Your wife decides to go out with her friends drinking and dancing....

You're okay with it, because you get to watch sports and play on the Internet all night...

You hear her stumble into bed around 4 and laugh knowing she's going to have a monster hangover....

You wake up the next morning and go outside to the family Volvo, which she used last night....

You sigh in relief because it's all in one piece....

You circle the car looking for dents and find none....

But ....

wait...

Wait...

Just a damn minute...

The Demographics of American Newspapers

The Demographics of American Newspapers:

1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country.
2. The Washington Post is read by people who think they run the country.
3. The New York Times is read by people who think they should run thecountry and who are very good at crossword puzzles.
4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the country but don't really understand The New York Times. They do, however, like theirstatistics shown in pie charts.
5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country -- if they could find the time -- and if they didn't have to leaveSouthern California to do it.
6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the country and did a poor job of it, thank you very much.
7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure who's running the country and don't really care as long as they can get a seat on the train.
8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's running the country as long as they do something really scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.
9. The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country but need the baseball scores..
10. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure there is a country . . . or that anyone is running it; but if so, they oppose all thatthey stand for. There are occasional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped minority feminist atheist dwarfs who also happen to be illegal aliens from any other country or galaxy, provided of course, that they are not Republicans.
11. The National Enquirer is read by people trapped in line at the grocery store.

Murphy's Lesser Known Laws

1. Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
2. Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.
3. Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
4. Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.
5. The 50-50-90 rule: Anytime you have a 50-50 chance of getting something right, there's a 90% probability you'll get it wrong.
6. If you lined up all the cars in the world end to end, someone would be stupid enough to try to pass them, five or six at a time, on a hill, in the fog.
7. The things that come to those who wait will be the scraggly junk left by those who got there first.
8. The shin bone is a device for finding furniture in a dark room.
9. A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
10. When you go into court, you are putting yourself into the hands of 12 people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty.

Links of the Day - November 1, 2007

Epic News Alert 14.22

Is it Christmas Yet?