I do believe that the executive branch has certainly taken every opportunity to expand their power within the government because of the war that began on 9/11. I do find it highly ironic that the old Taliban and Osama Bin Laden was funded and supplied arms by the Reagen Administration as another way to defeat the communist Soviets in the 1980’s. Too many people and groups have allowed this transition unchecked

I am even more concerned about dots that are being connected here:

On July 20, 2007, Paul Craig Roberts, the former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, issued a public warning that “we are about to experience another 9/11-WMD experience” orchestrated by the current occupants of the White House. The purpose, he says, of attacking his own country is that “an attack will activate Bush’s new executive orders, which create a dictatorial police state in event of “national emergency.” He’s referring to NSPD-51, in which Bush gave himself the powers to do just that.

The Russian media, which published this story today, add that the “staged attack” would also be used to launch a war with Iran.

I’m not trying to be a conspiracy theorist, but a very scary picture emerges when you put the facts in a timeline:

• September 11, 2001 – The United States is attacked. Bush uses the attack on
  9/11 to enact the Patriot Act, start a war with Afghanistan, and start a war
  with Iraq (there’s obviously much more, but let’s keep it brief).
• October 1, 2002 -The Bush administration and Department of Homeland security creates NORTHCOM, which “organizes and executes homeland defense and civil support missions…as ordered by the president and secretary of defense.”
• May 9, 2007 – Bush issues NSPD-51, which gives him complete control of the government in the case of a broadly defined “emergency”.
• July 17, 2007 – Bush issues an Executive Order that gives him the power to seize the assets of anyone that interferes with his mission in Iraq.
• August 30, 2007 – Nuclear weapons are mysteriously taken out of storage, loaded on the wings of a B-52 bomber, and flown from North Dakota to Louisiana.
• September 7 and September 11, 2007 – Osama bin Laden reappears twice in 4 days, after not being seen or heard from since June of 2006.
• September 14, 2007 – Air Force to be grounded
• September 15, 2007 – Massive anti-war/impeachment march to be held in Washington D.C.
• October 1, 2007 – Scheduled start date of the National Applications Office, which will allow almost all law enforcement officials to use spy satellites on Americans that can penetrate through buildings and underground bunkers. Civil liberties advocates call it “Big Brother in the Sky”
• October 15-20, 2007 – “Vigilant Shield 08” to be conducted by NORTHCOM in Oregon and Arizona. Vigilant Shield 08 is described as an “exercise for homeland defense and defense support of civil authorities missions”, which some believe is code for a test run of martial law.

And these are just the things that we know about.

Connect all these dots, along with the undeniably logical analysis of a former Reagan administration official (not some blogger crackpot) which concludes that Bush has a lot to gain from attacking the United States, and the picture that emerges indicates that we as a country have a decision to make: Do we impeach and get these guys out of power or wait and come what may?

We, the People, have been too quick to allow the government to take away our rights in the name of security. It was a case then, tat if you were not with the POTUS then, you were obviously a traitor who was harboring Jihadist ideals. The media has not asked deep probing questions about the decisions that were made and the legislation that was passed over the last 6 years. They have been too busy spoon feeding us Britney, Paris, Lindsay and Owen. Even OJ is back in the news today. We need to start asking more questions, and demanding more answers. Persisting until we get answers that satisfy the people.

There is no doubt power corrupts. This has been shown time and again over the course of civilization. Whether it be ancient Rome or Nixonian tricks. Some might even say the Clinton administration had been corrupt.

I honestly don’t know if this administration is capable of actually pulling the trigger on this plan. I certainly hope not. Because if they do, then this is a country I no longer recognize and that scares me.

The only question is if this scenario is probable is there someone inside in the know who might say, this is wrong. It is too often we are surrounded by yes men (or woman) who are unwilling or unable to provide or listen to contradictory information that is fundamentally wrong. A collection of individuals can very easily fall into groupthink, and when you add in the trip of being the most powerful man in the world it is not hard to see this playing out.

I am constantly reminded of the movie V is for Vendetta. Very scary. Here are a view quotes. Let me know what you think, I have substituted Grand Chancellor Adam Sutlers name with the POTUS name. Does it seem as plausible to you as it does to me?

V : There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and 0ppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who’s to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you’re looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn’t be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler George Bush. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent.

SutlerBush: What we need right now is a clear message to the people of this country. This message must be read in every newspaper, heard on every radio, seen on every television… I want *everyone* to *remember*, why they *need* us!

I think is important to emphasize the last statement about numerous flaws in this plan. I would also like to point out that having the government build and maintain a national database is just a recipe for disaster. How long until the bad guys hack into that system? How long until some smart kid somewhere does the same thing? No IT system is flawless and just opens up numerous opportunities for more fraudulent activities that wont make us more secure!

Would it not be easier, and less costly to focus on tracking down the 10-20% of the total US population that might be planning on doing bad things here or abroad, rather than trying to track 240 million or so law abiding citizens who have no plans to perform acts of terror? You do the math. We just seem to be moving more towards a

Here is another story from a similar vein of why DHS or any part of the federal government should have anything to do with building a substantial database like this:

DHS Data Mining System Shut Down After Privacy Slip Ups

Jen is stating that there could be a conspiracy between the Bush administration and/or high ranking republicans and the arrest of Larry Craig. Now normally, I would say most conspiracy theories are complete garbage and utter hogwash, but what she is saying makes a fair bit of sense. Here it is and decide for yourself.

The other day, Arlen Specter (an old-school Republican who’s still in the Senate) spoke publicly in defense of Larry Craig (the guy that got caught looking to get freaky in an airport men’s room).

This is puzzling, being that it’s political suicide. Arlen Specter has been around forever (he served on the Warren Commission, for God’s sake) and wouldn’t get in the middle of this sex scandal unless he had a damn good political reason. So what could that reason be? What is the connection between Arlen Specter and Larry Craig?

I am not sure it is political suicide for Arlen Specter to say Craig got railroaded. I do think Specter, a former prosecutor from Pennsylvania was probably looking at the case and said it looks kind of flimsy. I always believed it was a flimsy case, in my opinion was the Larry Craig plead guilty very quickly in an effort to sweep it under the rug and leave it in Minnesota. Somehow I doubt Craig ever expected to get called out, as it were, by Roll Call.

I’m pretty sure it all comes back to eavesdropping (paging Richard Nixon).

Arlen Specter is pissed about the NSA spying program, which allows a wide range of phone calls to be tapped by the Bush administration with no oversight. Another person who has been openly against this program, it turns out, is Larry Craig (go figure that bathroom boy wants to keep his personal life private). Specter wants to challenge the Bush administration on the spying program and is going to need all the votes that he can get, especially from the Republicans. The resignation of Larry Craig, because of this gay sex scandal, takes one of those Senate votes away. Score one for Bush.

Bush would also score in another way by releasing this story about Craig: it scares the other hypocritical Republican in-the-closet gay Senators into submission (because the guy who outed Craig is quite certain there are more). It’s a “vote my way or I’ll Larry Craig your ass” type of thing.

In this regard, the timing of Craig’s outing works well for the Bush administration (keep in mind that Larry Craig was arrested three months ago, but this information is just coming out now). In the next few weeks Bush wants $50 billion more approved for the war, Bush’s NSA spying program is going to be revisited, and Bush needs his next Attorney General to be approved. He’s going to need his Republican Senator’s votes for all of these tasks.

(As a side note, the timing of Craig’s outing (the day after Alberto Gonzales resigned) also served to bury the news coverage of Gonzales’ resignation. With a new sex scandal to cover, the media didn’t look too deeply into why the Attorney General had to go.)

This isn’t just a crazy conspiracy theory. There is a lot of speculation in Washington DC that Craig was set up, and the circumstances around his arrest (undercover cop working to bust gay guys in an airport) does raise questions. There is also the revelation that George W. Bush has referred to Larry Craig as “a God damned traitor” and that Bush had instructed the National Republican Senatorial Committee as early as December 2005 to look for someone to run against Larry Craig in 2008. Would it really be that surprising to find out that the Bush administration ate one of their own, especially one that Bush considered a “traitor” who needed to be replaced in the Senate?

Larry Craig himself said he was “railroaded” on the message he left for his lawyer on the wrong answering machine. Arlen Specter is willing to put is ass on the line for this. Craig even took back his resignation.

And no one has been pointing fingers at the Democrats. If they’re not pointing at the Democrats as the railroaders, who else could it be?

It’s all speculation, of course, but it makes sense. Your thoughts?

It certainly seems reasonable that this initiative was not driven by the Democrats, because every republican would be crawling under from underneath their rock, claiming this is 100% political and slinging as much mud as they can on the opposing party.  (Don’t get me wrong, I believe all politicians are slime, so I am not singling out just the GOP)

If any of the these revelations or conspiracies ultimately prove to be true, then I think, other than the hypocrisy of being in the closet, this case and the entire career of Larry Craig might require another review. It does not seem inconceivable to believe that the Bush supporters might go as far as setting up a sitting US Senator in order to defend and/or extend his policies.   The cynic in me says this is just too ripe and reasonable to just walk away from.

I also agree that this is very Nixonian in the potential depth. But then again when you look at the architects of the Bush White House, there are some very direct lines from 1974. 

It is possible that this is nothing more than a guy who caught with his proverbial pants down, but there is enough circumstantial evidence to imply otherwise.  Someone smarter than me, with more contacts needs to investigate the issues here in an effort to uncover the truth.  I realize in these political charged times, the truth does not always matter or amount to a hill of beans, but when we are dealing with illegal and unconstitutional activities then it is the right and responsibilities of the citizens to demand the truth.  Most times, an investigation uncovers nothing nefarious, but sometimes it is more.and it takes someone to put the pieces together and solve the puzzle.  Whether it is following the money, like Woodward and Bernstein did 33 years ago or following the email now someone needs to take the time and find out the truth.  Is that too much to ask?

As Republican Hypocrisy Party Tanks, Conservatives Lean Libertarian

Yesterday, MSNBC news network, Chris Mattews introduced a daily newspaper editor from one of the “most conservative papers in America.” She corrected him, saying their editorial page was conservative, and then corrected herself, saying “more Libertarian, really.” It’s another sign of the descent of the Republican party, when a staunch conservative paper disavows a connection to the party.

As the Republican party faces an almost daily onslaught of breaking news portraying its leaders as unethical, scandalous and incompetent, more and more Republicans and their supporters in the media– anchors, pundits, commentators, even whole newspaper editorial departments, are characterizing themselves as Libertarian, as opposed to Republican.

It gets me thinking a bit, I am not sure how I feel about this group taking on the libertarian label as an effort to move away from the neo-conservatives recent bad publicity. Now I will be the first to admit that a staunch libertarian certainly shares some beliefs with a true conservative; smaller government, lower taxes, and support for state rights. However, the the conservative opinions around family values, defense spending and taking to the fight on the war on terror outside the territorial US differ significantly from my positions.

With Sleaze, Corruption and Scandal clouding the Republican party’s image in america, this is bad news for the Christian right. Hypocrisy almost seems to be the mainstay of republican leaders.

It seems that in America, people are a lot more tolerant of one’s sexual pecadillos than they are of hypocrisy. They’ll tolerate a gay congressman, at least in and from some states, but not one who votes against gay rights while engaging in homosexual acts. Hypocrisy doesn’t cut it.

It is also interesting as I have written in the past about the potential demise of the democratic party, becaues of their lack of organization perhaps we are actually watching the death of the GOP (which is an ironic name Grand Old Pary, since they have been around since 1856, while the Democrats essentially date back to the founding fathers). Perhaps all the work that Karl Rove has done to build the Republican party for the next 30 years, could ultimately wind up being the same thing that kills the entire party as they have lost touch with their base. I have always thought that the time was right for a 3rd party, perhaps I just had the wrong party going away.

I am salivating at the thought.

Last December, former Republican congressman and current critic of the Bush admin, Bob Barr became a Libertarian. On TV, we have Bill Maher, Lou Dobbs, TUcker Carlson, who have declared themselves not republican or democrat. I won’t be surprised to see Joe Scarborough, who’s been moving to the center on many issues, embracing Libertarianism… same with Chris Matthews.

It will be harder for already elected members of congress. But there could be a good that comes out of this. As more and more right wingers distance themselves from the current hypocrisy and scandal ridden current incarnation of the Republican party, they may find themselves unhappy with the current two party election system. If some influential pundits and politicians finally wake up and realize that the election system is broken and two party elections are a big part of the problem, then maybe instant run-off voting and equal treatment for third parties will become major issues that the most disliked congress in recent history will have to face.

Meanwhile, the Republican hypocrisy machine churns on. The dump Larry Craig in the flash of an eye, because a Republican Governor in Idaho can replace him with a Republican Senator. But David Vitter, caught in a relationship with a whore house gets a pass because he’s in a state with a Democratic Governor. Now that Larry Craig has been pushed off the ledge by his party, the lamestream media should be boosting the Republican hypocrisy story on Vitter to their highest rotation. Why do they give him a pass. Tne news anchors should be asking all the Republcan leaders this question. We’ll see, in a few hours, this Sunday morning, whether any of the sunday political shows do their jobs or prove they are part of the problem of the mainstream media.

I have already pontificated about the lack of courage in our current political structure. That is someone who is willing to stand up, take a stand for what they believe regardless of the consequences of their actions. Joe Lieberman thinks of himself as courageous, but the fact that he turned his back on the party of his own state makes me question how courageous he really is, versus his own need to fulfil his selfish ego. I also wonder where are the great leaders today?

Are they being drawn into sports as coaches? Are they going into business looking to turn a buck, rather than give back to the public sector? Are they avoiding politics because of the amount and depth of scrutiny that mass media and the internet can provide, digging deep into the skeletons of potentially good leaders, making them choose not to get involved? I remember growing up in New York State, under Governor Mario Cuomo and thinking he would make a great presidential candidate. He never threw his hat in the ring, and some suspected because of illegal crime connections earlier in his political career. I don’t know, but if it was true, it would have eventually come up then and especially today.

A person needs to (literally) keep their nose clean from the moment they step onto a college campus, or maybe even their high school hallways if they hope to acheive public office in the future. They must live the near-perfect life, never making any major mistakes, never encountering any extreme duress. What this seems to make is a perfect made-for-TV candidate, but what they lack is real life experience, mistakes, and character. I don’t know if that is what makes a great leader, but I have to believe this modern methodology causes politicians to lack serious leadership capabilities and experience.

I was recently reading a Stephen Ambrose book about General Dwight D. Eisenhower, which talked about how the battles of El Alamein, helped forge Ike’s leadership ability. Although the allies were ultimately victorious, there were plenty of tactical mistakes made. Ike took these lessons and applied them to the D-Day plans and the overall European invasion. Many historians believe without the North African campaign, we might not have won the war so quickly. Eisenhower was able to learn, adapt and build himself into a great leader. One of the best things that Ike brought to the presidency 10 years after El ALamein, was bringing the country together, (in spite of having Richard Nixon as his VP).

It is interesting to contrast that former president’s career to our current president. George W. Bush clearly has a flawed past, which has been well documented elsewhere. There is no doubt he has skeletons in his closet that his family and supporters have done a great job suppressing and keeping from the public view or at least been able to mitigate the political effects of those skeletons. It is a bit sad that Bush has not used these past experiences to become a great leader. He is not been able to lead the entire country, but rather feels he only needs to represent those that voted for him.

I am hard-pressed to think of a great political leader today from either party. Maybe it is impossible in the information age for a true leader to emerge, because they need to be more concerned with glad handing and fund raising. I am hard-pressed to think of a great leader in the past 20 years or more. Someone that stands the test of time, that someone with a different political viewpoint would say, yes they were a great leader because they did what was right for the country, not for their party.

Is this simply a function of my getting older and more cynical, or have times really changed and attributes like courage and leadership are not as important as looking good for the camera, kow-towing to the political extremes, and the continual pushing of sound bytes themes into the news cameras and radio airwaves.

I honestly have no idea if what is alleged below has really happened in the way detailed or not, or is this just another political bigmouth, looking for attention to spout his opinion or to sell his book or who has an ax to grind? One of the problems with today’s political environment and with this concept of Web 2.0 is that anyone can say anything and if said with enough conviction than it must be true. Hell, that is what I am doing now.

What I cannot figure out about this piece is how do we convince our legislators to investigate to determine if this is true or not? How do we get the mainstream media to look for todays Deep Throat, someone who is morally opposed to what is happening in the government, to look into the dark corners and confirm or deny rumors or suspicions like this, rather than trying to report shallow entertainment related news?

Without someone in authority, who has the courage to ask the tough questions, to guide the general public to what is real, and what is fluff or spin, we will never know. Now all that happens is the pundits just blow harder in an attempt to enrage their opponents and motivate their supporters. So ultimately the message and messenger becomes more and more extreme because that is what is getting the attention from the mainstream media. This is the preferred path today, rather than engaging in an actual discussion to determine what is best for the country and working together and cooperating to actually accomplish some good. This would certainly assist us in determining whether the administration is pilfering funds, and not allowing congress to investigate because the chief executive has signed non-binding statement.

I realize that Congress could spend its entire term investigating the improprieties of the executive branch, past administrations included, but maybe that will keep the role of the president limited to their constitutional responsibilities, rather than trying to be the decider against the wishes of the people, or the guy who sells evenings at the White House to top fundraisers.

It would not be shocking if this administration is attempting to pull similar shenanigans that the Reagan administration tried in Central America in the mid to late 1980’s. It also seems like a bad idea to implement another plan, which is very similar to a plan that was a public relations disaster and might not have even achieved the desired gains in the first place. For as much as I bust upon the President and Vice-President, I cannot believe they are this stupid. But maybe that is exactly what is going on, who knows?

In my humble opinion it was worth printing the whole article by Dave Lindorff, let me know what you think about it and help me decide.

It was always clear that the $21 billion in Iraq reconstruction funds, most of which disappeared into Iraq (much of it was in the form of bales of $100 bills), didn’t just vanish.
Given the number of veterans of the Iran-Contra scandal operating in the Bush White House and Pentagon–many of them convicted felons or unindicted co-conspirators in that baroque criminal scandal from the Reagan presidency–it seemed obvious that such easy cash would end up being funnelled into secret wars and secret military projects, as well as other nefarious activities.
Now we learn from ace investigative reporter Sy Hersh, speaking on CNN that Bush and his criminal crew have been using this illicit, stolen cash to fund covert attacks on Iranian targets, and that much of the money has been going–get this–to Sunni jihadists linked to Al-Qaeda–the very people we’re fighting in Iraq!
This is surely taking that old saw, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” to the extreme! First we let Osama Bin Laden escape from Tora Bora, and now we’re funding him and his allies, supposedly to attack our new enemy, Iran. It’s enough to make you queasy. Osama must be laughing all the way to the bank. First we set him up, when we wanted him to attack the Soviets in Afghanistan. Then he turned on us and attacked us. And now we’re back to supporting him again.

No wonder when Congress passed a bill creating an office of inspector general to check on all that vanishing Iraq cash, Bush furtively issued one of his “signing statements” saying that the new inspector would be barred from examining any funds that involved the Pentagon–effectively nullifying the law!
Now, it should be pointed out that under anti-terrorism legislation submitted by the administration and passed into law by the Congress, providing aid to Al-Qaeda or to organizations in any way linked to terrorism is a federal crime and classifies the perpetrator as an abettor of terrorism and even as an “unlawful combatant,” subject to loss of citizenship rights, and suitable for rendition to Guantanamo or some other secret torture hell-hole.
I suppose the proper thing at this point would be for some patriotic prosecutor or some general to march into the White House and haul the president off to be waterboarded until he lays out all the details of his treasonous actions. (Sure he is the president and is immune from prosecution, but if he’s an “unlawful combatant,” none of that applies. The president has declared this to be so.)
For make no mistake: secretly providing money to terrorist organizations that are daily attacking Americans in Iraq, in order to ignite a new war against Iran, especially at a time that the US military is stretched beyond the limit in Iraq, is nothing short of treason. Even viewed in a more minimalist way, absconding with public funds and diverting them to illegal purposes is criminal fraud.
If Congress does not jump on this immediately, its members will have betrayed their oaths and the nation.
These are dangerous times. We are being led by bloodthirsty men drunk with power and the people who are supposed to be standing up to them are afraid to lift a finger.
The time is fast approaching when the only way America’s beleaguered and abused troops will be able to defend themselves will be by laying down their arms–or perhaps turning them on their demented leaders.

If this is true then the mainstream media should be ashamed of themselves since they are clearly not doing the jobs. Being a member of the mainstream media means that you are responsible to the citizens of the country to investigate and report on wrong doing. You need to be a bulldog and not except a sound bite for an answer. You need to keep asking questions until you get relevant and valid answers. And you need to find additional sources who will provide information, because activities like the described above will most definitely leave a money trail. Someone will talk eventually, they always do, but only if the right questions are ask in the right manner at the right time. That means asking the same question multiple ways that cannot be misinterpreted or misconstrued by a lawyer. Too much time and money is spent on Anna Nicole Smith and Britney Spears and Posh Spice since that is what the masses want.

I am unable to ask those questions to people that matter beyond my elected officials, one of which is already known as a lying sack while another is off gallivanting around the country in an attempt to convince the country that he should be president. I am only able to sit here and question what is really happening, and how is this in my best interest as a citizen of this country? Even if it is not true, how is it possible that 21 billion dollars can just go missing? There are too many open ended questions here not to continue to pursue an answer. Even if we as a country don’t like the answer. Even if some of the presidents supports agree with this tactic, the question of the constitutionality of these allegations remain unanswered and we the people deserve an answer. But hey, that is just me.

Today is a great day!!

Today is the first day of the new baseball season when Pitchers and Catchers report. It is almost like the you can feel the winter coming to an end (in spite of todays snowy forecast) and a warm breeze blowing in your face. It is the smell in the air, and the pop as a ball hits a mitt.

Pitchers and Catchers reporting has a magically sound to the ears. Like birds singing this morning in the back yard, since they too must know that spring is almost sprung. All teams start today with an equal chance, a clean record, last year removed from memory, and just like spring itself, they are ready to bloom anew.

Everything is fresh and clean, with no scent of scandal. No steroids, no contraction, no fire-sales, no more salary arbitration. The winter olympics are being played in Italy, and it doesn’t matter. Pitchers and Catchers report today and everything is going to be alright again since baseball is now back.

Today is a great day!!

SLOWLY BUT surely, the National Security Agency’s eavesdropping on Americans suspected of ties with foreign terrorists is being brought under the rule of law. But the Bush administration still owes not just Congress but the country some straight answers about the program.

Last week, Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales agreed to provide Congress details of the program’s new arrangement for being monitored by a special court set up by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Gonzales’ latest concession comes a few weeks after the administration abruptly reversed itself and said that it could, after all, conduct surveillance of international calls and e-mails under the court’s supervision.

But the administration has still refused to spell out whether the court will approve individual requests for wiretapping authority — as it traditionally has done — or just sign off on more general requests. This is the crucial question.

A Justice Department official said last month that the new court orders are not “cookie-cutter” and were more specific than an “advisory opinion” on the overall program. That sounds encouraging, but the public deserves to know whether the administration is providing the court with probable cause about specific U.S. citizens.

Perhaps the answer to that question is in the documents Gonzales is turning over to Congress. If so, it should be shared with the public.

No one suggests that investigators should publicize the names or locations of people under suspicion or the technology being used to capture their communications. But it shouldn’t be a state secret whether the NSA is getting case-by-case approval for surveillance of Americans or engaging in some less discriminate “data mining.”

Two realities strengthen the hand of Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and other lawmakers who want to bring oversight to the program: the new Democratic-controlled Congress and a lawsuit that reached a federal appeals court in Cincinnati last week. Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), who succeeded Specter as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, is threatening new legislation if the documents suggest the administration hasn’t achieved the “proper balance” between privacy and security. Last week, two of three judges on a panel of the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati reacted skeptically to the suggestion that a legal challenge to the original program was moot.

The attacks of 9/11 changed a lot of things in the United States — but not the meaning of the 4th Amendment or the need for congressional oversight of the executive branch. The administration can show its respect for these principles by being more forthcoming with the American people about its activities.

Apparently, you can put a price on this kind of publicity.

Turner Broadcasting and Interference Inc., the ad agency responsible for placing 38
electronic promotions-turned-bomb scares around Boston last Wednesday, have agreed to pony up $2 million to make amends for a Lite-Brite-esque Aqua Teen Hunger Force publicity campaign that effectively shut down the city.

This is one time when I think that perpetrator of this PR stunt did nothing wrong, and should not have to pay for the stupidity and overreaction of one cities overzealous police, mayor and congressional representatives. Boston Mayor Thomas Menino is spewing left and right about how he wants to go after those responsible, well according to August J. Pollack:

Menino is going on TV and insisting he’s going to send a 27-year old artist to jail for not breaking any law, because his police department overreacted and wasted a million dollars feeding a media frenzy and terrorizing the population of his own city. That’s a cowardly act of self-preservation, and were he not threatening the life of an innocent young man it would be laughable.

Let’s get a few facts straight on the Aqua Teen Hunger Force sign fiasco:

1. Attorney General Martha Coakley needs to shut up and stop using the word “hoax.” There was no hoax. Hoax implies Turner Networks and the ATHF people were trying to defraud or confuse people as to what they were doing. Hoax implies they were trying to make their signs look like bombs. They weren’t. They made Lite-Brite signs of a cartoon character giving the finger.

2. It bears repeating again that Turner, and especially Berdovsky, did absolutely nothing illegal. The devices were not bombs. They did not look like bombs. They were all placed in public spaces and caused no obstruction to traffic or commerce. At most, Berdovsky is guilty of littering or illegal flyering.

3. The “devices” were placed in ten cities, and have been there for over two weeks. No other city managed to freak out and commit an entire platoon of police officers to scaring their own city claiming they might be bombs. No other mayor agreed to talk to Fox News with any statement beyond “no comment” when spending the day asking if this was a “terrorist dry run.”

4. There is nothing, not a single thing, remotely suggesting that Turner or the guerrilla marketing firm they hired intended to cause a public disturbance. Many have claimed the signs were “like saying ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.” Wrong. This was like taping a picture of a fire to the wall of a theater and someone freaked out and called the fire department.

It should be noted that these same devices were placed in 14 other cities weeks before the Boston incident and no one even made a peep. If this is further evidence that this is really much ado about nothing, then I don’t know what is. This either means the rest of the country is a prime target for Al-Queda since we were caught with our pants down, or we (Outside of Beantown) have enough common sense to say this does not look like anything suspect and therefore we should not call in the bomb squad over nothing. It so clearly looks like a cartoon image, and I seriously doubt someone looking to do harm, would take the time to design a pretty interface. But hey. maybe that is just me.

Congratulations to Tony Dungy and the rest of the Indianapolis organization. They played an excellent game, even after giving up a 92 yard opening kick-off return to open the game. An early 7-0 whole and an interception by Manning made it look like the Colts could be conquered by the Bears. But by the time the kids were bathed, storied and in bed, the score was 14-9 Bears, and the Colts seemed to be warming up to the rain. I was amazed at how methodically the Colts ate up the clock and tired down the aggressive Bears Defense. Kudo’s to the Bears tired D for keeping the Colts O out of the end zone in the second half.

It was a bit surprising seeing the Colts offense being so conservative, run, dump pass, run, etc. I would have like to see Peyton air out a few more balls in the second half. For as much as they had the ball, you would have thunk that the Colts won by 20-30 pionts. Obviously it worked, but would it have killed them to kick a field goal at the end of the game since it cost me $500? (I had the Colts 2, and Bears 7 box (yes I won $150 at the end of the 3rd quarter, so I am not complaining too much)). I know Dungy did not want to A) embarass his friend Lovie Smith by not running up the score, and B) worry about a blocked field goal that could have been run back for a TD and given Da Bears a shot of life but still you do have Mr. Automatic Adam Viniteiri kicking, at least give me a shot. Oh well.

My final thought on this football season is Bill Irsay and the entire Irsay family are still reprehensible scumbags in my mind, for the way they abandoned Baltimore in the middle of the night so many years ago. It is a shame that the Baltimore did not consider doing what Cleveland did more recently. You can take the franchise, but you cannot take the team name and history with it. I don’t remember the details, but Browns fan maybe can refresh my memory, but when the not so honorable Art Modell moved his franchise from Cleveland to Baltimore, Cleveland fought to keep the Browns name and history in Cleveland. Thus the Baltimore Ravens were born.

I just wish Baltimore had done the same thing with the Colts. Whenever I think of the Colts, I automatically think of Baltimore, not Indianapolis. I think of Unitas, Shula, Donovan, Bert Jones, Lydell Mitchell. I remember that famous scene in Diner, where the guys are grilling Ellen Barkin about Colts History to see if she is worthy of marriage. It clearly show how closely the folks who lived there associated their lives with their team. Even an episode of Homicide:Life on the Street touched on this subject with the crotchety old Ned Beatty playing Stanley Bolander, lamenting how the only football team that belongs in Baltimore is the Colts, not the CFL team that played there then, nor the Ravens who currently reside there. Somehow, this victory has to bite a bit for those Johnny U fans down in Charm City.

This franchise that just won the Super Bowl really should be known by another nickname and the Ravens should be known as the Colts. Anyone got any good suggestions on what this team should have been renamed when they moved?

I am no lawyer, but I figured either the Players Union or the Commissioner himself would ultimately reject it on those grounds alone. Winds up, sure as the sun rises in the east, Bud Selig nixed the deal over some personal services language in the contract, which actually seems to have nothing to do with the out clause.

It is somewhat sad that it is next to impossible that the soon-to-be home run king is so tainted he can’t even sign a contract with the team he helped keep in their current city and was responsible for the privately funded stadium in which they play. Not sure what the relevance is, other than it helps me get in the mood for baseball.

The three branches have been successful in governing this country for 200 or so years. When one branch attempts to usurp too much power, it is the responsibility of the other branches to step in, and bring the balance of power back to level. It is time that Congress take back their powers and put the executive branch back in its place, for today and tomorrow.

Stopping the War by Constitutional Law by John Nichols.

The document is clear in its language: “The Congress shall have the power… To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water; To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years; To provide and maintain a navy; To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress…”

If that makes it sound as if control over matters military was placed squarely in the hands of the House and Senate, then the founders succeeded in communicating their intent. James Madison and the other authors of the Constitution were exceptionally blunt about their hope that the president would serve as a mere commander-in-chief, implementing the directions of the Congress with regard to the targets or military actions, the characters of those actions and their durations.

The founders bluntly stated their fears about executive excess in a time of military conflict. “War is in fact the true nurse of executive aggrandizement,” warned Madison, who explained that, “In war, a physical force is to be created; and it is the executive will, which is to direct it. In war, the public treasuries are to be unlocked; and it is the executive hand which is to dispense them. In war, the honors and emoluments of office are to be multiplied; and it is the executive patronage under which they are to be enjoyed; and it is the executive brow they are to encircle. The strongest passions and most dangerous weaknesses of the human breast; ambition, avarice, vanity, the honorable or venal love of fame, are all in conspiracy against the desire and duty of peace.”

The Constitution was written “to chain the dogs of war” by founders who believed it essential that the endeavor be “run by committee” — with the legislative branch fully empowered to check and balance the ambition, the avarice and the vanity of the executive.

Only in the spin-driven politics of the post-9/11 era could Cheney and Bush continue to peddle their fantasies about executive supremacy and an imperial presidency. They have taken advantage, masterfully at some points, brutally at others, of an on-bended-knee Washington press corps and a spineless Congress to control the dialogue and the direction of the country for more than four years. And, in so doing, they have sunk the nation deeper and deeper into the quagmire that is Iraq and the disaster that is their approach to a world that no longer trusts or even understands the actions of the United States.

Cheney and Bush have gotten away with a lot. But they have not succeeded in erasing the Constitution.

On January 30, the primacy of the essential document was reasserted, as Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold chaired a full Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the topic of “Exercising Congress’s Constitutional Power to End a War.”

“Congress holds the power of the purse and if the President continues to advance his failed Iraq policy, we have the responsibility to use that power to safely redeploy our troops from Iraq,” says Feingold, a Democrat who also chairs the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution. “This hearing will help inform my colleagues and the public about Congress’s power to end a war and how that power has been used in the past.”

“I will soon be introducing legislation to use the power of the purse to end what is clearly one of the greatest mistakes in the history of our nation’s foreign policy,” explained Feingold, who in recent weeks has emerged as the most ardent advocate for using the power of the purse to force a shift in administration policy.

When that legislation is introduced, there will be those who suggest that Feingold and his allies are moving the country toward a “Constitutional crisis” — with Congress demanding the redeployment of troops from Iraq and Bush refusing.

In fact, the crisis has already occurred. The executive branch is operating far outside the limits of the authority afforded it by the Constitution.

Congress has not only the power but the responsibility to restore the system of checks and balances, and with it an appropriate regard for the founding document of a great yet threatened republic.

Bernie has patrolled centerfield at Yankee Stadium, the same hallowed ground as the legends Mantle and DiMaggio before. He has always conducted himself with honor and class. He has played his entire career in one uniform, very similar to the two men being enshrined in Cooperstown this summer. He was never a clubhouse nuisance, or arrested or accused of illegal behaviour. There was some concern he would flee to Boston a few years back, but the speculation was Bernie never wanted to put on another uniform besides the pinstripes. Williams helped bring the World Series trophy back to New York in 1996, 1998, 1999, and 2000. He is one of the remaining current crop that came up through their own system along with Jeter, Posada, and Rivera who have been here for the entire run.

The Yankees have a long history and tradition. I want to believe that they don’t want to unceremoniously dump Bernie. He performed very well (.281/12/61) last season in what was supposed to be a part time role, but became more when Matsui and Sheffield went down with injuries for most of the regular season. But the Yankees are trying to get younger, and faster and need to give some young kids a chance. It is a shame that the idea of Bernie trying 1st base last season, since that might have been incentive to keep him, but after the Mike Piazza 1st base fiasco a few years ago in Shea, there is no reason to believe that this would be any different.

So, it is with great sadness that barring a major injury, the Yankees are going to need to part company with Bernie Williams soon. Then Bernie needs to decide if he is going to retire, or try to catch on with another team and don another uniform. If he does retire, then the Yankees should hire him as a minor league instructor or a Latin American scout, something to keep him in the organization. He is a much better role model than Darryl Strawberry or Dwight Gooden, who have spent time after their playing career in the employ of the Yankees.

However, Joe Torre is not making his bosses job any easier, by saying he wants to give Bernie a chance, here. As the Replacement Level Weblog says:

What are the odds that if Bernie gets a shot at making the team from Joe Torre, he doesn’t make it? Please Brian Cashman, hold firm.

 

He also has done some statistical analysis of the proposed Red Sox trade, which I discussed yesterday here, and says Helton is really only good for 1-1.5 more win shares. That makes me breathe a little easier if this trade actually goes through. ]]> http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/29/yankees-in-tough-spot-with-bernie-williams/feed/ 3 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/29/vice-squad-and-your-privacy/ http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/29/vice-squad-and-your-privacy/#comments Tue, 30 Jan 2007 02:36:23 +0000 Jeff Herz http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/01/29/vice-squad-and-your-privacy/ So I saw this piece from the St. Louis Post Dispatch, written by Kevin Horrigan, Vice Squad: A perfectly legitimate scoop, which does a great job of summing up my concerns with the recent violations of personal civil rights by members of the executive branch.  It begs the question of where is the line of what is permissible, and what is exempt. 

Dick Cheney is on Fox News. He is saying the Pentagon has every right to collect information from banks, phone companies and credit bureaus “on people we have reason to suspect.”
 
All the Pentagon has to do, he says, is send a “national security letter” to, say, a bank, stating one of its customers is a “potential terrorist target,” and presto! The information is theirs. No need for judges, warrants or anything else. Just write a letter.
 
Suddenly the Defense Department is in the business of snooping into Americans’ lives. Isn’t that the FBI’s job? Don’t the Army and Navy have other things to do?
 
Dick Cheney says not to worry about it.

“It’s perfectly legitimate activity. There’s nothing wrong with it or illegal. It doesn’t violate people’s civil rights,” Dick Cheney says.

On the flip side, I am in total agreement with Jim Caple, from ESPN.com. a die-hard Red Sox fan that they have joined the Yankees as a co-Evil Empire having out spent every other team in baseball, except the Bronx Bombers. Can you really still hate the devil, if you have yourself become the devil? Odd position that those chaps up in Beantown Here are Caple’s words:

Not convinced the Red Sox have turned into the Yankees? Then consider this. No team has ever paid more money for a world championship than did the 2004 Red Sox (the Yankees have spent more trying to win, but their payroll was a mere $114 million when they won the Series in 2000). Further, when those Red Sox recorded the final out of that World Series, not a single player on the field was homegrown. When the Sox open the 2007 season, they may have just two homegrown players in the lineup, first baseman Kevin Youkilis and second baseman Dustin Pedroia.

The best thing about this story, is that it reminds me that in just a few short weeks, pitchers and catchers will begin to report to camps in Florida and Arizona, and a new glorious season will begin.

WE hear constantly now about “our commander in chief.” The word has become a synonym for “president.” It is said that we “elect a commander in chief.” It is asked whether this or that candidate is “worthy to be our commander in chief.”

But the president is not our commander in chief. He certainly is not mine. I am not in the Army.

According to the Constitution of the United States in Article 2, Section 2, the first sentence says:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

 

This point is quite simple, the President is not the Commander in Chief of the civilian population. He is not the Commander in Chief of the Army, the Navy and any state militia that has been federalized. For any national guard unit that is still under the command of their respective states governor, the president is not their Commander in Chief. This where, in my humble opinion, 99% of the national guard units should currently be deployed (in their home states) actively fighting the war on terror at home, not half way around the world, but again, that is another story for another day. To go back to Mr. Wills Op-Ed:

When Abraham Lincoln took actions based on military considerations, he gave himself the proper title, “commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.” That title is rarely — more like never — heard today. It is just “commander in chief,” or even “commander in chief of the United States.” This reflects the increasing militarization of our politics. The citizenry at large is now thought of as under military discipline. In wartime, it is true, people submit to the national leadership more than in peacetime. The executive branch takes actions in secret, unaccountable to the electorate, to hide its moves from the enemy and protect national secrets. Constitutional shortcuts are taken “for the duration.” But those impositions are removed when normal life returns.

 

I think it is time for the civilian population of this country to remind the current president and all the hopefuls out there what the limits are of the role Commander in Chief and to do everything possible that no sitting president ever usurps that role and tries to push their military titles upon the civilians.

Wait a minute, it is a bad sign when you immediately digress from your original rant about how terrible Miami Vice (the TV Series) is, and go right into the lyrics of ‘Jukebox Hero’ by Foreigner. So let me backtrack. I am watching TV tonight, hurray new Simpson’s and Season Premiere of King of the Hill. But I have to wait until 8, so I check the TiVo to see what crap this alleged artificial intelligence (intelligent filtering) has recorded on my behalf. Well it recorded an old episode of Miami Vice, and I decided to give it a whirl.

Now, as I started before. Picture the scene. It is Friday Night, circa 1985. I am home alone, my sister is off to college, not sure where my parents are, but I seemed to be home alone a lot of Friday night, but that is perhaps another story. So I spend the night engrossed in network television, since that is all we had growing up (I know I was deprived). A few years back it would have been Airwolf, Love Boat and Fantasy Island (or maybe that was a Saturday night, not sure). Either way, I remember watching Miami Vice every single Friday night, when I was in my early teens before I joined the in crowd and got a life (read drank beer). Anyway, I loved that show, and thought it was great television. But I think I had some serious screws loose after watching an actual episode tonight.

I have been unable to watch this show recently because I was concerned it would shatter my fond memories. I put this program in the same category at Welcome Back Kotter, a good show at the time that everyone liked, but I was afraid it would not hold up over time, some other classic 70 sitcoms, I fear the same thing for Barney Miller. Boy was I right about not wanting to watch this show.

I watched this terrible episode from 1987, which is clearly after it jumped the shark (Tubbs has a beard). It was about a dead reggae star who died and was cryogenicly frozen so he could be brought back to life later, think Ted Williams as a Rastafarian. I started laughing half way through the show, since the premise of the episode was so far off base and incredibaly unbelievable. It made no sense and was absolutely so pretentious it was comical. Anyone else feel the same way about Miami Vice?

Speaking of Tonight’s Simpson episode, the best line is without a doubt:

Marge : Revenge never solves anything!
Homer: Then what’s American doing in Iraq?

I also enjoyed the closing credits where they dedicated this episode to all the characters who died during the filming of Star Wars including Storm Trooper #22, Storm Trooper #5, all the people aboard the two death stars, but unfortunately not Jar-Jar Binks. Great Stuff. Good to see the Simpson’s writers are still on top of their game after 34 centuries on TV.

Finally, I also just saw a preview for Ghost Rider, the new Nicolas Cage movie. Any remember a time when he was actually considered a good actor who starred in good Movies? My favorite Nicolas Cage movie is Leaving Las Vegas, Red Rock West, Family Man and of course Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Do you remember when Cage was a semi-respectable actor?

A major research institution has just announced the discovery of the densest element yet known to science. The new element has been named “Bushcronium.”

Bushcronium has one neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 224 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 311.

These particles are held together by dark forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.

The symbol for Bushcronium is “W.”

Bushcronium’s mass actually increases over time, as morons randomly interact and become assistant-deputy neutrons in a Bushcronium molecule, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to believe that Bushcronium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as “Critical Morass.”

When catalyzed with money, Bushcronium activates Foxnewsium, an element that radiates orders of magnitude more energy, albeit as incoherent noise, since it has 1/2 as many peons but twice as many morons.

 

No one wants the government rifling through his or her bank accounts. The FBI has no business perusing your grocery lists. The right of privacy is clear in this country. With very few exceptions, the government has no reason to mandate that you tell them about your finances, your relationships, or your personal health.

That is why Representative Naomi Jakobsson’s bill, HB115, is unconstitutional. The bill requires that sixth grade girls receive the vaccination for HPV before going to public or private school. Many similar laws and proposals have cropped up in other states as well.The decision to get the HPV vaccine should be between a woman, her parents if applicable, and her doctor. HB115 does not specifically require that girls entering the sixth grade get the vaccine, but it does require the disclosure of whether that vaccine has been administered or not. The school has no need of that information. The right of privacy dictates that the government cannot demand private sexual health information.

Schools have a compelling interest to know which students are vaccinated or not for diseases such as polio, mumps and the like. These diseases can be transmitted in the classroom where students are required to congregate. Even if parents choose not to vaccinate, the schools could use the information to contain an outbreak should one occur.

With HPV, no plausible or allowable situation would allow for the transmission of a sexually transmitted disease in school. Quite simply students aren’t allowed to have sex at school for obvious reasons.

Now, I don’t know much about this particular drug, but I agree there is no reason to mandate any child to receive a drug (especially expiremental) unless it is for the common good, such as those mentioned above. I don’t know, maybe I am naive, and I don’t know the actual odds, but it does not seem that so many people are getting this form of cancer that necessitates every woman ir gyrl receiving this vaccine. Seems more like a Pharma marketing department trying to do a doctors job, and that really bothers me. Almost as much as a legislator from Illinois doing the marketing job for a major drug company. Or maybe it is just me.

I am also a little bothered that I have seen TV commercials pushing this type of drug, and having woman ask their doctors about it. Maybe I am old fashioned, but I was a big supporter of Pharma marketing (B2B) only to physicians and hospitals, rather than this recent trend (B2C) direct to the consumer, think Cialis, Levitra, Lipitor, Zoloft, etc.
On a somewhat different note, I find it interesting that the public school my kindergarten son attends has detailed medical information which includes the name of my wife’s OB/GYN that delivered my son, the type of delivery it was (Vaginal/C-Section) and whether there were any complications associated with the birth. Now my question is, why the Frig do the schools need this information. I understand if a child has a developmental issue, then a psychologist or a social worker might want to investigate these factors to determine a correlation between these events and the outcome of a child’s abilities. But to the best of my knowledge, Jacob is a normal, well adjusted 5 year old.
I am sure, when we enrolled him in public school one of the forms we signed authorized the school or the board of education to obtain this information, but my fundamental question is why? What is the relevance of the public school having this information, and more importantly what are they doing to protect Jacob and my wife’s privacy? Who has access to this information? Is it digital or still on paper? Can any staff person access this or just his Principal, Vice-Principle, Teacher, Social Worker, Janitor, etc?

This makes me think I need to ask a few more questions regarding this policy before I am satisfied. I have a sneaky feeling I am not going to like what I hear.