Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

It’s Treason: Dems Stay Silent on Bush White House Crimes

By Richard W. Behan, AlterNet. Posted November 16, 2007.


Lying to the people and the Congress was the most despicable violation of the rule of law by Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, but many more followed.
20071116story
20071116story
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

--Article III, Section 3, United States Constitution (emphasis added)


The mainstream Democrats -- represented, say, by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Joe Biden, and Christopher Dodd -- have not levied war against the United States. Their treason lies instead in committing the second offense: They adhere to enemies of the country, giving them aid and comfort.

The enemies are President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney. Like no other president and vice president in history, these men attacked their country.

It was not our geography George Bush and Richard Cheney invaded. Instead they abandoned and subverted the bedrock institution of our constitutional democracy: the rule of law. By word and deed, Mr. Bush repeatedly and arrogantly sets himself above the law, claiming obedience to be a matter of presidential choice. Mr. Cheney orchestrates, coaches, applauds and iterates.

This cannot stand if the country we know and cherish is to survive. George Bush and Richard Cheney are literally enemies of the state; long before now and by any measure of constitutional justice, they should have been impeached and removed from office.

Abjectly, continuously and stubbornly refusing to hold them accountable, however, the mainstream Democrats adhere to this criminal president and vice president: Nothing they have asked for has been denied, no barriers placed in their way. That is giving them aid and comfort, and that is treason. George Bush and Richard Cheney took the country to war illegally, with a deliberate, carefully designed and executed package of fear-mongering propaganda: lies, distortions and deceptions. No informed citizen entertains the slightest doubt about this.

Lying to the people and the Congress was the most despicable violation of the rule of law by Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, but many more followed: torturing prisoners, denying habeas corpus, spying on U.S. citizens, nullifying new laws with "signing statements" and so on and on. The litany of impeachable offenses is long and painful, but the so-called "War on Terror," these men insist, makes all of it acceptable, even necessary. Nearly six years have elapsed since the Bush administration first defeated the rule of law. For most of these years, a Republican Congress saw fit not to intervene, or even to question this behavior, so effective was the administration's propaganda campaign and so firm were the bonds of partisanship. But now the mainstream Democrats control the Congress.

Also during these six years, the truth emerged, and now we can see the "War on Terror" truly for what it is -- an overarching megalie, an untruth of such unimaginable scope and magnitude it recalibrates for an entire nation the perception of reality. (Aryan supremacy was the megalie of Nazi Germany.) No one should be surprised that the threat of terrorism has increased, not diminished, since 9/11: the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were not even remotely intended to combat it.

We know the Bush administration, when it took office, was indifferent to terrorism, brushing aside explicit warnings about al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden; we know the president was planning instead, at least six months before 9/11, to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq; we know of a National Security Council memorandum dated Feb. 3, 2001, concerning the "capture of new and existing oil and gas fields" in Iraq; we have acquired with a lawsuit the maps of Iraqi oil fields Vice President Cheney's "Energy Task Force" was studying a month later; we have learned how the privatized structure of Iraq's postwar oil industry was designed by the Bush administration a year before the war began; we know the administration was negotiating pipeline rights-of-way with the Taliban, unsuccessfully, until five weeks before 9/11; we know the final threat to them was a "carpet of bombs"; we are aware of President Bush twice refusing offers from the Taliban to surrender Osama bin Laden, before and after the carpet of bombs was unleashed; we've read of the five "megabases" in Iraq to house 100,000 troops for as long as 50 years; we've learned the U.S. Embassy compound under construction in Baghdad will be ten times larger than any other in the world; and we know Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell, and British Petroleum/Amoco are poised to claim immense profits from 81 percent of Iraq's undeveloped oil fields.

Are these the activities and outcomes of a "War on Terror?"

We also know President Bush, a month before 9/11 in August of 2001, notified the governments of Pakistan and India he would launch a military mission into Afghanistan "before the end of October."

Between the dates of the president's announcement and his order to attack, the Trade Towers and the Pentagon were struck by the hijacked airliners. Seizing in a heartbeat this spectacular opportunity to disguise and launch the preplanned invasions, the Bush administration concocted the megalie, and the "War on Terror" was born.

The "War on Terror" is a conscious and ingenious masquerade for the geostrategic pursuit and control of Middle Eastern oil and gas resources. The facts place this beyond dispute. Mr. Bush's claim of "taking the fight directly to the terrorists … and the states that harbor them" was yet one more intentional deception, as subsequent events fully demonstrated. In Afghanistan the state was overthrown instead of apprehending the terrorists -- Osama bin Laden remains at large -- and in Iraq, when we invaded, there were no terrorists at all. But today both "states" are fitted with puppet governments and dotted with permanent U.S. military bases in close proximity to their hydrocarbon assets.

Only the Bush administration continues to natter about a bogus "War on Terror." Others are more candid:

  • Republican Sen. Senator Charles Hagel: "People say we're not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America's national interest. What the hell do you think they're talking about? We're not there for figs." (Speaking at Catholic University, Sept. 24, 2007)
  • Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, in his book The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World: "I'm saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: The Iraq war is largely about oil."
  • Democratic Sen. Jon Tester: "We're still fighting a war in Iraq and people who are honest about it will admit we're there over oil." (Associated Press, Sept. 24, 2007)
  • Gen. John Abizaid, retired CENTCOM commander: "Of course it's about oil, we can't really deny that." (Speaking at Stanford University, Oct. 13, 2007)
The criminal fraudulence of the "War on Terror" is fully documented, but the contemporary press has been derelict in failing to expose the mega-lie and publicize it. The mainstream Democrats are equally derelict in ignoring it. Failing to hold President Bush accountable for his crimes constitutes the most profound obstruction of justice. And failing to contradict his hideous megalie clearly reinforces the president's hand: the mainstream Democrats are now accomplices.

The damage done by the Democrats' treason is equally great in prospect. Without exposing the lie of the war in Iraq and acting upon the exposure, there is no credible and reliable way to stop the administration's insane intention of attacking Iran. The proffered rationales -- and the fraudulence -- are identical, as the Democrats stride toward complicity in yet another illegal and immoral war.

Why can't the mainstream Democrats speak sublime truth to demonic power? Doing so, they claim, would be too "divisive" and jeopardize the party's success in next year's election.

This strategy is politically suicidal. A Democratic sweep in 2008 grows dimmer every day.

The rank-and-file Republicans who continue to believe Mr. Bush's lies about the "War on Terror" will not vote for a Democrat. The rank-and-file Democrats who see through the lies are increasingly enraged by the insipid waffling of their mainstream candidates. And roughly half the American people don't bother to vote at all, repelled by the tawdry attack ads and negativity of bitterly partisan, superficial, sophomoric and issue-avoidance politicking.

If the mainstream Democrats do nothing to change this, they will wind up where they're headed -- disappointed and defeated in 2008 -- and they will deserve it. Only by exposing and acting on the truth about the war can they change any Republican minds, regain the support of disenchanted Democrats and attract the politically inert, indifferent Americans. A new style of politics needs badly to be engaged, one that is dedicated not merely to winning elections, but to a genuine concern for truth, for justice, for the rule of law and for integrity in public service.

The most direct and honorable way of invoking such a style is by impeaching George Bush and Richard Cheney. Never in our history have the high crimes and misdemeanors been so flagrant, and the people of our country know it.

Yes, congressman Kucinich sought with a "member's privilege" motion to initiate an impeachment proceeding on the floor of the House of Representatives. But Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer moved immediately to kill the initiative, only to be thwarted by a Republican trick. Finally, Nancy Pelosi, desperate to avoid a floor debate, managed to have the matter referred to the Judiciary Committee, where Chairman John Conyers has been sitting on the original bill since last April. The giving of aid and comfort to the enemies will, seemingly, continue.

But the mainstream Democrats now face a carpe diem moment of truly historic measure: If they choose, they can foreswear their treason. It was a majority, bipartisan vote that sent the impeachment bill to Judiciary, and that is all the political cover the Democrats need to take the next courageous and necessary step.

For the sake of the rule of law, for the sake of the integrity of the Congress, for the sake of the country's future and incidentally for the sake of a potential Democratic victory in 2008, the politics of truth and justice must be showcased. The Judiciary Committtee must hold hearings immediately, to see if impeachment is in fact warranted -- and polls say the greater part of the country thinks it is.

If the mainstream Democrats will not do this, if their treason continues, then decent and thinking citizens everywhere -- concerned patriots all -- can only weep for their country.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: congress, bush, democrats, cheney, war on terror, pelosi, reid

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hard hitting piece
Posted by: vox persona on Nov 16, 2007 12:48 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yay for Alternet. This article says whet I think, say and write on a regular basis. I do admit to some hesitance about the word treasonous to describe the Democrats. Enablers? Yes. Facilitators? Definitely. Gutless? Undoubtably. But treasonous? I do think it was treasonous to out a covert CIA operative in an overt political vendetta. Even Papa Bush said outing operatives was the lowest form of treason. So yes, this administration is surely guilty of impeachable offenses, including the classic definition of treason. And the MSM was the biggest enablers of all time. They can make the top story for months the runaway bride, the miising blond girl (fill in your name of choice) and celebrity trials, but that just lets real stories of life and death slip through the cracks. It's disgusting that 'we' depend on them as if the "real news" they parcel out to us like so much pabulum. If they put a fraction of the effort they do covering celebrity trials to covering the way Bush stacked the mining commission with the biggest polluters/contributors, installing industry lobbyists/lawyers to head every environmental agency they are supposedly protecting us from, or emphasizing daily the same points brought up in the article (like war plans made long before the "9/11 attack",etc.), the public themselves would be clamoring for heads to roll, and not just us Alternet types. The enabling press finally seems to be awakening and realizing it's safe to attack this criminal administration using actual facts, but it's still slow going. If we can just survive these cretins, maybe this world will stand a chance. The Dems may be invertebrate, but the 4th Estate may just come through, and realize the profit it exposing these devils. We can only hope....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hard hitting piece Posted by: TruePatriot5
» The New Fascist ideology Posted by: citizenjoe
» RE: Hard hitting piece Posted by: Nick
» RE: Hard hitting piece Posted by: dbkchi
VERY GOOD ARTICLE!
Posted by: TruePatriot5 on Nov 16, 2007 1:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I could never understand why Speaker Pelosi stated right at the start of the 110th Congress that impeachment was off the table, makes me wonder what Bush/Cheney are threatening her with!

Every member of Congress took a sworn oath to UPHOLD, DEFEND and PROTECT the U.S. Constitution, yet all they have done is rubber stamp every demand that the "decider" has put forth! Speaker Pelosi and Harry Reid are hoping that mr. decider is going to compromise with them, yeah, his way or the highway, the man has no idea what the word compromise even means!

We should all just vote INDEPENDENT in the next election, and vote for Congressman Ron Paul for President! He is one of the few members of Congress who vote in accordance with the Constitution. Three cheers for Dennis Kucinich who has the backbone to sponsor the bill!There are so few real Statesmen left in our government anymore, so sad!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I agree vote independen Posted by: skoog5600
» RE: I agree vote independent Posted by: Intellect
» RE: I agree vote independent Posted by: Christie
» I agree vote independent Posted by: skoog5600
» RE: Ron Paul...No Way! Posted by: peacelf
» RE: on Paul...No Way! Posted by: SoCalLib
» Wrong on that Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: SoCalLib
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: SoCalLib
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: MAD
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: SoCalLib
» Israel and Ron Paul Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: Intellect
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: Wrong on that Posted by: ad132
» Voting for independents Posted by: EinMD
» Ron Paul all the way! Posted by: CUnknown
» Ron Paul? No Way! Posted by: Ellie1
» RE: on Paul? No Way! Posted by: dover23
» RE: on Paul? No Way! Posted by: peacelf
» Peace now RP2008 Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: Peace now RP2008 Posted by: ad132
» RE: Peace now RP2008 Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: Peace now RP2008 Posted by: Lauren
» RE: on Paul? No Way! Posted by: ad132
» Well said, peacelf.... Posted by: Pepper
» He's the anti-control freak Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» Ban him please Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: on Paul? No Way! Posted by: MAD
» RE: Ron Paul No Way! Posted by: huggybean
» RE: on Paul all the way! Posted by: Intellect
» *flabbergasted* Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: on Paul all the way! Posted by: left_libertarian
» RE: VERY GOOD ARTICLE! Posted by: Turkiye
» Congressional sign-off Posted by: brunowe
» RE: AIPAC is not "Jewish" Posted by: channing
THIS STORY RESELLS the ULTIMATE LIE – (9/11)
Posted by: stryder on Nov 16, 2007 1:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Virtually all this was known before “war on terror” at Iraq War began.

“We know the Bush administration, when it took office, was indifferent to terrorism, brushing aside explicit warnings about al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden; we know the president was planning instead, at least six months before 9/11, to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq…”

WRONG.

What we know is “al Qaeda” starring CIA asset Osama bin Laden (a.k.a. “Tim Osman”) was a fully funded US and Saudi front operation run out of Pakistan’s ISI, MI6 and CIA shells among others. This is hardly being “indifferent to terrorism” .

What we know is that up to several hundred 9/11 Israeli spies detected by DEA, FBI and CIA ops were caught (some with box-cutters and explosives) as they tracked “hijackers” and US intelligence. (The 9/11 Israeli spy scandal was hushed up out of Washington and Israel)

What we know is that the official 9/11 fairytale is an acknowledged COVER-UP that fewer than 15% of Americans believe in. Kean and Hamilton have gone on record to state that “the [9/11] Commission was set up to fail” and “a a lot of people have things to hide [on 9/11] … right up to Bill Clinton or George Bush.”

What we know from these outtakes is that top CIA pros have said that:

“9/11 is a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke"
(Ray McGovern)

"I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war”
(Robert David Steele)

“…a monstrous series of lies… “a joke” … “Tragically, the entire course of U.S. foreign and domestic policies since that date [9/11] has grown out of these almost certain falsehoods."
(CIA NIO officer William Christison)

“The final [9/11] report is ultimately a coverup.”
(CIA Division Chief Melvin Goodman)



A COVER-UP at 9/11 is directly responsible for phony “war on terror” abroad and the destruction of human rights at home.

False 9/11 and a Crypto-Fascist “war on terror” state are one and the same. We also know that a COVER-UP at 9/11 is naked proof of democracy MIA in America and around the globe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» strong dollar... Posted by: Iconoclast421
» strong dollar... Posted by: Iconoclast421
Hear hear!
Posted by: bleppo on Nov 16, 2007 1:18 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And that's why so many liberals I know have reversed their positions on gun control and now support the NRA!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Damn that thing looks SWEEEEET! Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» Got Dew? Posted by: eddie torres
one and the same.
Posted by: c.e.stokes on Nov 16, 2007 2:57 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
this is a fact i have known for most of my adult life.it does not matter which party is in office, they are one and the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What c.e. stokes said! Posted by: Gravitas
» RE: one and the same. Posted by: Intellect
» RE: one and the same. Posted by: left_libertarian
» RE: one and the same. Posted by: c.e.stokes
WE CAN MAKE IMPEACHMENT HAPPEN!
Posted by: aharlib on Nov 16, 2007 3:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
TO MAKE IMPEACHMENT HAPPEN, CALL THESE FOLKS EVERY DAY: CONYERS, HOYER, PELOSI, THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND CONGRESS CRITTERS.

WE THE PEOPLE CAN FORCE CONGRESS TO DO THEIR JOB TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION IF WE PRESSURE THEM HARD ENOUGH.

Information on
House Committee on the Judiciary

Contact Information
Majority (Democrats) Minority (Republicans)
Committee Office: Rayburn House Office Building 2138 Rayburn House Office Building B351-C
Committee Phone: 202-225-3951 202-225-6504
Committee FAX: 202-225-7682
Committee Email: http://judiciary.house.gov/contact.aspx (Entire Committee)



Staff
Majority Communications Director Jonathan Godfrey - (202) 225-3951
Majority Press Secretary/Spokesperson Melanie Roussell - (202) 225-3951
Majority Staff Director/Chief Counsel Perry Apelbaum - (202) 225-3951
Minority Chief Minority Counselor Joseph Gibson - (202) 226-0002
Minority Communications Director Kim Smith - (202) 225-6906
Committee Membership
Majority Members (Democrats)
Member Name DC Phone DC FAX Email
John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) [Chairman] 202-225-5126 202-225-0072 http://www.house.gov/writerep/
Howard L. Berman (D-CA) 202-225-4695 202-225-3196 http://www.house.gov/berman/contact/
Rick Boucher (D-VA) 202-225-3861 202-225-0442 http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?
option=com_content&
task=view&id=645&Itemid=
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) 202-225-5635 202-225-6923 http://www.house.gov/nadler/emailform.shtml
Robert C. Scott (D-VA) 202-225-8351 202-225-8354 http://www.house.gov/writerep/?Submit=Email+Bobby+Scott
Melvin L. Watt (D-NC) 202-225-1510 202-225-1512 http://watt.house.gov/IQform.asp
Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) 202-225-3072 202-225-3336 http://lofgren.house.gov/emailform.shtml
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) 202-225-3816 202-225-3317 http://www.jacksonlee.house.gov/feedback.cfm?
campaign=jacksonlee&
type=Let%27s%20Talk
Maxine Waters (D-CA) 202-225-2201 202-225-7854 http://www.house.gov/waters/IMA/issue.htm
Bill Delahunt (D-MA) 202-225-3111 202-225-5658 william.delahunt@mail.house.gov
Robert Wexler (D-FL) 202-225-3001 202-225-5974 http://www.wexler.house.gov/email.shtml
Linda T. Sanchez (D-CA) 202-225-6676 202-226-1012 http://www.house.gov/writerep/
Steve Ira Cohen (D-TN) 202-225-3265 202-225-5663 http://cohen.house.gov/option=com_email_form&Itemid=111
Hank Johnson (D-GA) 202-225-1605 202-226-0691 http://hankjohnson.house.gov/contact.shtml
Betty Sutton (D-OH) 202-225-3401 202-225-2266 http://sutton.house.gov/about/emailform.cfm
Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) 202-225-8203 202-225-7810 http://luisgutierrez.house.gov/feedback.cfm?
campaign=luisgutierrez&
type=Let%27s%20Talk
Brad Sherman (D-CA) 202-225-5911 202-225-5879 http://www.house.gov/sherman/contact/
Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) 202-225-2906 202-225-6942 http://www.house.gov/formbaldwin/IMA/get_address.htm
Anthony Weiner (D-NY) 202-225-6616 202-226-7253 weiner@mail.house.gov
Adam Schiff (D-CA) 202-225-4176 202-225-5828 http://schiff.house.gov/HoR/CA29/Artur Davis (D-AL) 202-225-2665 202-226-9567 http://www.house.gov/arturdavis/zipauth.shtml
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) 202-225-7931 202-226-2052 http://wassermanschultz.house.gov/zipauth.htm
Keith Ellison (D-MN) 202-225-4755 202-225-4886 http://www.house.gov/writerep/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The farness fella.
Posted by: the fairness fella on Nov 16, 2007 4:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm puzzled as to why not more people are delving the"why" of Democratic gutlessness. It would seem to be a sure win for them for, as the writer proves, the case is pretty open and shut. So why? and why was the option so quickly and hushedly taken off the table by Nancy?

I'm afraid it's due to the Israel Lobby. Norman Podhoretz, Grand guru of the Neocons, he who hopes and prays Bush bombs Iran, he who advises Repub. front runner, Rudolf Guialni, Norman will tell you unabashadly that Israel has never had a better President. It's just a shame he has not been better for the US.

Norman thinks the Iraq war has been a success because it has fractured into warring tribes, an annoying neighbor of Israel's.

Attacking Iran will hopefully do the same, and that's why Norman says he hope and prays the US goes ahead. (He's on youtube saying just that, the hope and praying part)

Clearly, if Bush and Cheney are tried, the pressure tactics of the lobby, first for the Iraq war, and now for the Iran war, each with their set of shady actors, all of that threatens to come out.

Prudently, the Lobby has told the Dems, "Forget it." They, craven and beholden as they are, obey. Howard Dean learned his lesson and a lot of others learned well at the same time.

It's only a short term fix, if fix it is, because at the same time that the lobby pushes relentlessly for th third Middle east war, it also pushes the US towards disaster. Sooner or latter, there will be an awakening.

I would not have written this comment pre Meresheimer and Walt. One day indeed we might speak of eras as pre M and W and post M and W.

How to test the Dems, to see if there's a glimmer of truth to this? Ask Pelosi and the others if they support attacking Iran. If they equivocate at all, you have the answer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The farness fella. Posted by: EinMD
» RE: The farness fella. Posted by: Intellect
» RE: The farness fella. Posted by: TheOldHippy
Two sides of the same coin
Posted by: Frank J. Burris on Nov 16, 2007 4:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Until we have a true multiparty system, we're going to continue to see a single agenda being advanced by the Democrats and Republicans. I'm amazed that so many people still have faith in the Democratic party after witnessing its complicity with the Bush administration. And this complicity is going to continue unabated if Clinton, Obama or Edwards is elected, as they plan to maintain our imperial presence in Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Two sides of the same coin Posted by: Intellect
heres the truth
Posted by: justic2776 on Nov 16, 2007 4:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is the truth he has been keeping from us-PEAK OIL...really take the time to understand what it means and you will understand his twisted solutions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Peak oil + dead dollar Posted by: sunspot
Thought Crime Bill HR 1955 Curiously Unreported
Posted by: naomi dagen bloom on Nov 16, 2007 4:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On November 6, Ronni Bennett blogged about a dangerous bill that stealthily went through the House, passed by 404 to 6. Called the "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007," it is an amendmenment to Homeland Security Actof 2002.

Many of us, puzzled that our congressman signed , have called: no response about WHY, why did we need specific legislation that targets U.S. citizens? Will the always-willing Democrats in the Senate nod once again?

www.timegoesby.net is where you'll find several posts since that first one. Please join in asking questions. Did I mention that Kucinich was one of the six opposed? Yes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're simply assuming Posted by: brunowe
» RE:thanks for the link Posted by: channing
Where is Jane Fonda!
Posted by: rocketman on Nov 16, 2007 4:43 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

--Article III, Section 3, United States Constitution (emphasis added)"

then why is Jane Fonda walking around a free women all these years!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Where is Jane Fonda! Posted by: rocketman
» Definitions... Posted by: rocketman
» RE: Where is Jane Fonda! Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Where is Jane Fonda! Posted by: rocketman
» RE: Where is Jane Fonda! Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Where is Jane Fonda! Posted by: rocketman
» RE: Where is Jane Fonda! Posted by: abstractedaway
» RE: Where is Jane Fonda! Posted by: rocketman
» RE: Where is Jane Fonda! Posted by: channing
» Ask politely please Posted by: rocketman
Brainwash and ANNENBERG and USA!
Posted by: Orientalist on Nov 16, 2007 4:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Brainwash and Annenberg!
I been watching reruns on channel 10 of Annenbergs seminar with prominent leader figure from the society, politicians, judges, generals, priests, newspaper owners, journalists, you name it people high up in the chain, what's coming out of this seminars is totally submission to the "MARKET"! What's good for the market is good for me was and is the slogan! And if you look on the society today you must admit its a 100% success!
This is the root cause to why the American people act like fatalists, pacified and brainwashed by Annenberg. Its the MARKET you cant do anything about it! That's why there is no action or reaction about what's happening with our country. This brainwashing has been going on for decades and are now deep rooted in the people. I know of several other countries who have gone thru the same development. Billions has been invested in this process with this very successful result. TOTAL OBEDIENCE TO THE MARKET!
Nobody higher up in chain dare to questing this brainwashing because its against the Market. What's follow is what we have been watching played up in front of us for the last decades and this "MARKET" thinking is at its peek today. What's going to follow is up to the people if they ever going to realize what has happened to them! This awakening of the people is probably never going to happen as long as the MSM is in the same hands which has promoted this brainwash!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If it pleases the court... it's just my opinon your honor....
Posted by: rocketman on Nov 16, 2007 5:00 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm pretty amazed that after reading this article that "WE" knew all these facts about Bush and Co's preemptive actions against Iraq and Afghanistan.

I wish the author had listed sources for all we "know" because I doubt those claims are anything more than biased attacks instead of facts.

If in fact they were true one would have to evaluate them in context of the international threats to this country - or the personal gains of those in power. Where are the arguments that discount that!

Is oil a factor in our war over there.. no doubt..but is it protecting the oil resources for all or just to enrich Bush and Co. ?????

As of now what could be an enlightening article seems more like a baseless rant!

If one is making the case for treason
/impeachment etc .. please present a logical article with facts that can be backed up.. not just party lines!

As an aside I agree that Iraq was a folly outside the war on terror effort - but I have no proff..just logic. Afghanistan was not! - it will never hold up in court!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» All it takes is your time Posted by: gdonald
» RE: All it takes is your time Posted by: rocketman
» channing - Posted by: LeftWright
» Impeachment charges Posted by: EinMD
» Duck! Posted by: rocketman
» RE: Duck! Posted by: Intellect
A land of the mentally ill
Posted by: gdonald on Nov 16, 2007 5:13 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The writer hits it mostly correct. The participants of the corruption in Washington DC are from both sides of the aisle. American's by and large are unable to grasp the level of treason and the high crimes and misdemeanors that have been perpetrated in our halls of Congress and the Whitehouse for decades.

It is likely already to late but we must still try and clean out the barn. This can only happen by electing independents. Why? Because anyone you put into office from either two main parties will be nothing more than another corrupted player.

There is a term for a people who continually display the same behavior expecting a different outcome. It's called Mental Illness. We have a nation of mentally ill families because for generations they have voted Republican or Democrat and have lamented for generations how bad things are but yet vote again and again for their party hoping this time it will be different. Well, reality is, both parties have had their control points at various times in our history and our situation has constantly deteriorated under both parties leaderships to the point we find ourselves in today. Democrats failed just as Republicans failed to stop the crimes against we the people and against other nations and in fact facilitated in all the crimes if not actually participating in them.

If you don't get it now that you have been sold down the river by both Republicans and Democrats and you vote again this election for another Democrat or Republican then stop crying over the corruption and loss of our Republic because you support it.

I vote independent. I wised up about Democrats and Republicans along time ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A land of the mentally ill Posted by: Intellect
This is all Bull
Posted by: jreal on Nov 16, 2007 5:16 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been hearing this crap for too long... "Impeach Bush/Cheney"... "They are behind the attacks on 9/11", blah blah blah.

Obviously your wrong or they would have been impeached. If Bush had the opportunity to recieve Osama Bin Laden, then that would have been huge. But if he denied his custody so that he can continue this mega-military complex gold mine for his buddies, well that might be treasonous.

But guess what, that didn't happen. If it did, and there is proof, then he would already be in a prison cell. It would be all over the news.

But you say the mainstream media just doesn't have any backbone. Well, I say, if you got a backbone, get out from behind your desk and make some noise. Use the clout that you have and start nagging senators and representatives in public. Ask them the real questions. And get noticed doing it. Humiliate them. Do what you got to do, but if you have the proof, do more than write this piece because nobody is reading this but us.

Everything written on this site doesn't get past this site. So unless you want the truth to keep on looking like the "Looney Left", then get out there and start making some noise.

And by the way, Clinton, Edwards, and Obama aren't going to support impeachment because another presidential contender carved up the draft. And yes I know there's other "tresonous reasons" too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Stop hiding then Posted by: gdonald
» RE: This is all Bull REDUX Posted by: motamanx
» RE: This is all Bull Posted by: johng
» RE: This is all Bull Posted by: Intellect
As long as the Dems win the tug of war...
Posted by: peacelf on Nov 16, 2007 5:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...pulling progressive and liberal voters right of center, then nothing will change. Your vote is a reflection of your conscience, how much you're willing to be pulled and pushed into voting for a candidate who'll surely let you down, and how much of your values you're willing to sacrifice at the alter of "electability."

I say, have the courage to vote your conscience, even if it means losing an election. If the progressive vote went to the only progressive Dem, Dennis Kucinich, or a Green Party candidate, then it would send a message to the DNC to quit playing corporate politics, if they want to be elected.

In this country, nothing politically progressive is given. It must be taken!

peace

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RP2008 Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: Right On Intellect Posted by: MeridaLady
» RE: ight On Intellect Posted by: peacelf
» Change now Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: ight On Intellect Posted by: aonghus36
» Agreed, channing - Posted by: LeftWright
It is abour Bleeping time you folks got off your butts and wrote this piece!
Posted by: Nightstallion on Nov 16, 2007 6:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pretty mild all in all. The evidence of wrong doing on the part of this president is available in any speech given directly Post 9-11 three of them have better than 80% the very same words in English that Hitler used in German in 1939 I mean nearly Verbatim!

The problem of pulling ones head out of ones rectal orifice is that ones eyes are clouded with fecal material, I know been there done that! I got over it you will too do your damned homework people and stop spouting party line! The Demon rats are just as foul as the Republic-cons. So wash the crap off your face and Study the Situation instead of attacking your neighbor He may not have Voted for this cheer leading Idiot!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush and Cheney are fascists, really, truly
Posted by: citizenjoe on Nov 16, 2007 6:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you know the recent history of European fascism, you see how the ideology has changed, become more streamlined and adapted to current world conditions. Fascists like Haider (Austria) and Fini (Italy) see the possibility of fascism coming into power through ordinary politics, no thugs in the streets like the Squadristi, SS, or SA. Their strategy involves a rejection of the old fascism, the repudiation of "totalitarianism". (Sound familiar?) They focus on threats to "Western values" from the Muslim world and Muslim immigrants in particular become insidious enemies. The "war on terror" is made to order for the new fascists. Neo-liberalism is their economic policy because it brings about western corporate control of the world. Neo-conservatism is their political philosophy because it brings about a government that is mostly a political and military instrument for ruling a world empire. The welfare of western citizens will come from the great global corporations which are the economic back-bone of the world empire. Getting the idea? Bush is a new fascist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The last time I voted for Independent, a terrorist was elected
Posted by: jreal on Nov 16, 2007 6:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry, but unless someone out there makes enough noise to attract enough votes, your just wasting your vote.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good propaganda. Posted by: jreal
Why Congress won't act
Posted by: Democritus on Nov 16, 2007 6:41 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's a sad fact, but members of Congress who won't support Dennis Kuchinich's HR 333 to impeach Dick Cheney are simply playing politics. They think they won't get re-elected unless they just stand on the sidelines and let Bush and Cheney continue their self-destructive ways. The fact that they might also be complicit in an attack on Iran doesn't seem to faze them.

Here were the reasons offered by Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (FL, Dist. 20) for saying impeachment wasn't a good idea. Ms. Wasserman-Schultz is on the House Judiciary Committee and speaks for Nancy Pelosi. First, she says that we have to concentrate on getting out of Iraq. This is sheer blather. She and other Democrats still keep funding the war. Second, she says that there are more important things to do. This is absurd. It is not more important to set up investigative committees than it is to protect our Constitution. Third, she says that the press would "have a field day" in publicizing impeachment proceedings, crowding out all other news. Well, why not? What more important things do the media have to do, besides spreading "feel good" propaganda from the White House? Last, she says that Americans don't want to have impeachment hearings conducted. She should fire her poll-takers. Most Americans want to know the facts behind Cheney's and Bush's lies to the American public so they could go to war and thus curtail our Constitutional liberties. If Wasserman-Schultz can't read our citizenry any better than this, she should resign from office immediately.

It seems clear that the Democrats in Congress who don't support impeachment are the "money" Democrats, those who put the interests of corporations and economic globalization ahead of the interests of the people. These are the ones who secretly want to keep those military bases in Iraq, and who want U.S. corporations to profit from stealing Iraqi oil. They want to be known as being "tough on terror," when all this really means is adopting an "imperialist lite" view of how to conduct foreign relations, speaking out against Bush and Cheney, but still wanting to do the same thing, only better.

When Bush and Cheney threatened Iran with military force, what did Congress do to blunt this irrationality? Pelosi wanted to pass a House resolution to denounce our NATO ally Turkey for genocide--something that occurred in 1915! Hillary Clinton voted to declare Iran's Republican Guard--part of the Iranian army--as a terrorist organization! Senator Charles Schumer voted to confirm Mukasey as Attorney General, even though Mukasey doesn't know what torture is! If progressives have to confront this sort of mentality in leading members of the Democratic Party, it's going to be a long, uphill struggle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why Congress won't act Posted by: Turkiye
I Cry For My Country Every Day
Posted by: jdorsey on Nov 16, 2007 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You were able to put in words the very thoughts and frustrations of .....I am guessing...most honest, decent, thinking Americans. I have been a strong Democratic supporter all of my life. But no party alliegence ever again! ! ! ! I now realise how stupid that is. There are very few Democrats holding office who act like Americans. Dennis Kucinich is the ONLY candidate for president who lays it out truthfully and with clarity and common sense. He is the only one bringing up the fact that the Constitution is being shredded. And the very people we elected to protect that constitution are assisting Cheney, Bush and the rest of the traitors in dismantling it. Cheney and his gang of warhawks ARE the TERRORISTS ! I am more afraid of them than any band of crazy suicide bombers. Cheney has orchestrated the deaths of thousands of Americans and millions of Iraqis and innocent people worldwide. And the Democratic leadership for some reason is leaving that madman in office for 14 more months to terrorise the world.....instead of trying to stop him and his gang of outlaws. I do cry for my country, and for my children every single day. Democrats, republicans, citizens, please wake up and stop this insanity !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Troll Posted by: CUnknown
www.speaker.gov
Posted by: jdorsey on Nov 16, 2007 7:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Go to www.speaker.gov Click on "Contact Us"
Leave Nancy a message.

Call 202-225-0100 ask to leave a message for Nancy Pelosi. You are switched over so you can leave a recorded message.

If we ALL do this every day, maybe, just maybe they will get the message.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bottom Line
Posted by: Skunkatthepicnic on Nov 16, 2007 7:39 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I decided long ago that we have only one party. They have ALL been "purchased" by global corporatocracy. For me, this explains absolutely everything. And it's also one definition of fascism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is hope!
Posted by: nikkie on Nov 16, 2007 7:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wise up fellow Americans! Terrorism is not the enemy. You are! The only country with the backbone, the ideology and the constitutional guarantees that is capable of stopping the REAL ENEMY is/was America. It is you that is being attacked, from within, and once you are out of the way they can roll over the world AND YOU with ease.

I'm so sick of this incredibly inept 9/11 argument. The staggering accounting of implausible anomalies, open deception, overt corruption, incalculable preponderance, constitutional degradation, religious skulduggery and savage complicity will boggle historians as the single most inept moment in the history of "civilized" man.

I give you one 9/11 truth to think about. All things unravel if you understand the simplicity and truth of this logic. At the heart of the supposed terrorist myth is 1) an extreme and vengeful hatred of the Jews; and 2) an incredibly sophisticated and intelligent apparatus capable of designing and carrying out acts of terrorism with the goal of punishing the Jews and those that assist them in any way.

Now then, anyone who understands the above framework, either real or supposed, should easily be able to understand that the last thing these terrorists would overlook in devising their 9/11 attack plans is who gets hurt and who benefits, the latter being the catch. They would never have involved themselves in a scheme that benefited Larry Silverstein to the tune of 15 times over his investment. What a classic "takedown" and the most tragic of puns. From there it's easy to understand why the Pentagon was hit. Quite simply it made a victim out of the government, which gave them control over the [non]investigations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: There is hope! Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: There is hope! Posted by: abstractedaway
» RE: abstactedaway logic Posted by: channing
» oops! Posted by: january37
Summing up the Dems
Posted by: sofla100 on Nov 16, 2007 8:06 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary: Campaign cash king from the big business and insurance sector. Big supporter of more money for "national security" and the military. Big-time Israeli supporter, Iraq war and pending Iran war (our next fiasco) supporter (despite the blah, blah). So, yeah, she is smarter then Bush, but no different in how she would really act. You think she is going to go after the Repubs., why would she?

Obama: Smart guy and good talker. But an OREO and the Dems version of Condi Rice. Also on the take from the Banking and Insurance Campaign Contributor Sector (like Hillary). Could be a war guy, remember when Obama talked about invading Pakistan? As for going after the Repub. corruption, he is not going to rock the boat and the guys that feed him as well.

Kucinich: The best of them all. No evidence of being corrupt. But traction will be impossible. He threatens the status-quo too much and USA/Israeli/corporate interests would go after him if he was not such a minor-leaguer. He is too marginalized to be any threat to the Repubs.

Edwards: Superficially charming but underneath a good Southern boy. He talks some good lines, but, he knows where the power and money is. Consequently, he won't want any closets dumped out with investigations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Summing up the Dems Posted by: Knot_Rich
I know why impeachment is off the table
Posted by: Axiom69 on Nov 16, 2007 8:11 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's fairly simple when you think about it. All politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, have skeletons in their closets that they don't want anyone to know about. If you want to get your way with one of them just find their skeleton and threaten to parade it around unless they do your bidding. Does anyone wonder why the Demorats are getting LESS done with a majority in Congress than they did with a minority? Somebody has probably been advising them that their skeletons aren't as hidden as they thought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

False-flag operations are as old as governments.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Nov 16, 2007 8:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From the article:

"Between the dates of the president's announcement and his order to attack, the Trade Towers and the Pentagon were struck by the hijacked airliners. Seizing in a heartbeat this spectacular opportunity to disguise and launch the preplanned invasions, the Bush administration concocted the megalie, and the "War on Terror" was born."

Gee, what luck. What a "spectacular opportunity." Just like the burning of the Reichstag by Hitler was a spectacular opportunity for the Nazis. Just like the Gulf of Tonkin Incident was a spectacular opportunity for President Johnson. Just like "Operation Northwoods" could have been a spectacular opportunity for President Kennedy's desire to attack Cuba, had it been carried out.

For those of you who do not know, look up "Operation Northwoods"; it relates very closely to what happened on 9/11. (It seems a "Northwoods" derivative may have been carried out after all – just a few dacades later.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ah, the old NORAD canard Posted by: brunowe
We'll never impeach them for doing what we want
Posted by: Bic Pentameter on Nov 16, 2007 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most americans will happily parrot these lies, subconsciously hoping that US dominance will indefinitely support our unsustainable way of life. Most of us want to also believe that our conventional military superiority and outsized financial influence will enable us to dominate all of the world, if that's what it should take to insure that we'll never have to live like some of the other inhabitants of it.

The lies are merely lip service for the purpose of plausible deniability within the rest of the world (hey, we believed him and thought we were doing a good thing) and code-talk to the american people (stick with us and we'll keep the party rolling).

No matter how it is packaged, we will vote for more of the same. We will not vote for the inconvenient truth harshly exposed to us. We'll even make up our own delusional rationales on individual bases. But we are not ready to face the reality of the current situation.

And that is this:

The earth cannot support even a quarter of its population in the wasteful and indulgent manner that it supports us. For every wealthy person, many poor ones are needed to make possible an extravagant lifestyle. Accordingly, for every wealthy nation, poorer ones are needed to support the lifestyle. To live like we do, someone else, somewhere else, must toil for little reward, must provide the energy and raw materials for little reward to their own people.

In this way - and only in this way - can we purchase, say, a pair of shoes for less than the cost of mailing them back to the person who stitched them together. We get cheap goods and cheap gas on the backs of those who DO have to live in that manner that is so frightening for us to contemplate.

Impeach Bush or Cheney? Hell no, we'll find another pair just like them if we can. With a different wrapping perhaps, but not fundamentally different. And we'll continue to say that if everyone else were more like us they, too, could live like us. We're exceptional and that is how we prosper. We've never rigged the game or made moves to keep entire populations downtrodden and subservient to our appetites. Ask your neighbors and co-workers. We are the fairest and most moral society on earth, and we deserve all that we have.

About waterboarding, Rudy says: "Depends on who does it". We are so good that when we do something, it's good, even though it's bad for anyone else to do it. That's the type of denial collectively needed for us to take the next bold steps in dominating the world.

We'll subconsciously tell ouselves that it's better them than us. Kind of like the way populations of Europe offered up the Jews to avoid similar fates for themselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Take to the phone!
Posted by: kerttu on Nov 16, 2007 8:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with this poster 100%.
It is time for Us The People to act, and the constructive way to act is to call all the ones in power.
One simple question : Are you going to impeach Bush and Cheney?
If the answer is no, then ask WHY ? and take notes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Take to the phone! Posted by: kerttu
» RE: Take to the phone! Posted by: kerttu
» RE: Take to the phone! Posted by: jcstras
ACLU-SC Calls for Impeachment of Bush and Cheney voted and dated11/14/2007
Posted by: Turkiye on Nov 16, 2007 8:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"ACLU-SC has called for the Impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for High Crimes and Misdemeanors arising out of their abuse of power and numerous violations of the Constitution.

Voted on November 14, 2007 without obection ( 1 abstention ) to call on Congress promptly convene on Impeachment hearings.

The ACLU-SC called for Impeachment hearings on Nixon in 1971 1nd 1973 and was joined by the National Board of the ACLU.

Further details to follow"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

jcstras
Posted by: jcstras on Nov 16, 2007 8:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All this talk talk talk.....We have Three choices before us, but I am positive that due to the fact we have all become so obese(something that is exactly what they wanted in the first place)that we will just continue to lay on our couches watching those stupid TV shows, and won't do anything anyway. Those choices are...One: Revolution which would be perfect now since our army has become so weakened that there is no way it could fight all of us if we united to overthrow the corrupt government. Two: Impeach Bush and Cheney which probably wouldn't work because all that would accomplish would be that they would be replaced with two more politicians that are as corrupt. The whole government needs to be purged of LAWYERS. Get them out of government, and you will once again have government of the people, by the people. And Lastly, my favorite...Third: The election of Ron Paul as President! Now that would be great! The man believes in civil disobedience, wants to disband the IRS, and get us out of IRAQ! I can't see anything wrong with that, can you? And have you all noticed how he is being ignored by the press? Of course....he stands for honesty for a change...and he isn't a LAWYER!! Son of a Bitch!! We couldn't have that, Could we? Some one that represents the average man? He is a doctor! He is a congressman from Houston, Texas and has been in congress for over twenty years and is still the only honest politician left!! There you have it, plain and simple...Revolution, impeachment, or elect an honest man for a change. At sixty two years of age, I really think that this country is going down the tubes... look at the present gneration with their obsession with idiots like Britney Spears and the like. You think for one minute that they have the moral fiber that it takes to turn this country around? I seriously doubt it! I do believe we are "Circling the drain"!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dems are a dead end: took you a long time to work that one out
Posted by: Bobsays on Nov 16, 2007 8:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It could even be criminal for the left to spend so much time thinking and praying the Dems are the saviours. They aren't.

Drop the Dems and form a proper Social Democratic Party of the USA with strong alliances with European social democrats.

It is time to stop the fudge factory: stand up and speak up as social democrats. It would be a robust weapon against the right and it would clarify things for once. Wishy washy is for Chinese laundries.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» excellent idea Posted by: Coleman
» RE: excellent idea Posted by: Intellect
BUSH CHENEY PRIORITIES
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Nov 16, 2007 9:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most people appointed to positions by Bush were and continue to be dismal failures. One group has not failed. Bush and Cheney have extraordinary legal advisors. Impeachment plans have been laid out by experts and we are all in agreement they should be removed from office.But they have an army of lawyers who will take on anybody for as many years as it takes. With a year left, Bush has nothing to lose. He knows that. Damage control is important now. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BUSH CHENEY PRIORITIES Posted by: Intellect
Vote independent?
Posted by: xi_people on Nov 16, 2007 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I laugh at the prevalence of the lame suggestion that voting "independent" will change the political calculus by one iota. It is equally amusing to see that there are still people who think that bombarding their congressional "representatives" will help in any way, shape or form.

The point at which the American system of government could be "saved" is long since past -- if it ever existed. Collapse is inevitable. The only real question is 'when?'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You are probably right Posted by: gdonald
» Third Party movement Posted by: CUnknown
mainstream dems are...
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Nov 16, 2007 9:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
nothing more than republican lite. they are all corporatists...maybe we need a third party description that encompasses the 'truth' - members of this party would include almost all repubs AND dems...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AIPAC rules
Posted by: Nick on Nov 16, 2007 9:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They want this idiot long enough in the office to strike Iran

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» AIPAC WINS ALSO UNDER HILLARY Posted by: sofla100
It's never too late. RECALL Pelosi, even post election criminal charges for Bush CO.
Posted by: common intelligence on Nov 16, 2007 10:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hear too many people expressing feelings of hopelessness here and of course in the sheeple. The only ones that never give up are the Republicans. They will deny and smoke screen until after their death. But all to many of you are not warriors for truth.

Like a marine, Never give up. you all have to be relentless, more so than those that hide behind "the flag, the last refuge of the scoundral" .

These bastards must not be allowed to go free. They must be held accountable. You all have enough facts.

Now get out there and banner-up!. FLood the damn phones, the streets, the walls of justice must be brokken through or you are all no better than the whole Bush pirates.

Stop feeling you have to justify, blame and collude with each other.

RECALL the failed ones you voted for. "We are the people of the United States of America" and we yeild to no bastards that would take our country. This means Domestic terrorists and treasonous pirates that have taken it.

SO,

"Just do it"! People of the world will rejoice and realize "the people are not to be screwed with.

Now get those banners up! Impeach, Recall. We'll get to the voting after we see who's left standing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pelosi is being blackmailed
Posted by: frantaylor on Nov 16, 2007 10:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's the only explanation. The administration has some major dirt on her, and they are threatening to expose it if she moves forward with impeachment. Why else would she behave the way she does?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Pelosi is being blackmailed Posted by: Frankstank
» RE: Pelosi is being blackmailed Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: Pelosi is being blackmailed Posted by: frantaylor
» RE: Pelosi is being blackmailed Posted by: Collielady
Lies as Treason ???
Posted by: Knot_Rich on Nov 16, 2007 10:52 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Lying to the people and the Congress was the most despicable violation of the rule of law by Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, but"
You can't be serious. There's not a Beltway politician today who could pass that litmus test. Lying to the people, now days they call it campaining.
Now, let me get back to trying to convince my wife how getting a blow job from a young girl isn't sex. After all, "I did not have sexual relations with that girl" worked for Bill. Caution, don't smoke any of his cigars, there's no telling for sure where it's been.
Oh, and talk about the most brazen scam ever pulled on the American public. How about using an adulterer who has an illigitimate child he's supporting with funds he's siphoning out of his organization as a counselor for committing adultery. Darn, those had to be some good story swapping sessions as Jesse and Bill sat there over congniac and cigars. Gotta hand it to them, that took balls for sure. If want to so something about politicas who lie to the people you better open your eyes beyond just those you hate and start casting a really broad net.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So what
Posted by: frantaylor on Nov 16, 2007 11:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Republicans went ahead with the Clinton impeachment knowing full well that they didn't have enough votes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So what Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: So what Posted by: frantaylor
9/11
Posted by: dwag1234 on Nov 16, 2007 11:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is it so difficult to believe that the attacks of 9/11 were NOT orchestrated by the Bush administration? Everything else that came after just followed their plan. That's the crime. And no one is going to touch that one. Democrats, Republicans, or Alternet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 9/11 Posted by: edgeofnowhere
» RE: Philsophical Addendum Posted by: channing
» RE: 9/11 Posted by: Intellect
Waste of time
Posted by: ProudRightWinger on Nov 16, 2007 12:12 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You left leaning robotic parrots better find something better to investigate. Impeachment? Never! You don't have the guts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wasted Pea-brain Posted by: Number_6
What??? I call bullplop.
Posted by: Ghoulman on Nov 16, 2007 12:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
from article...
"We also know President Bush, a month before 9/11 in August of 2001, notified the governments of Pakistan and India he would launch a military mission into Afghanistan "before the end of October."

Never heard this (and I am aware of a lot)! Source please.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What??? I call bullplop. Posted by: RWBehan
» Who was Chin Quoting? Posted by: matti
» RE: Who was Chin Quoting? Posted by: RWBehan
» Thanx RWBehan :) Posted by: Ghoulman
» RE: What??? I call bullplop. Posted by: RWBehan
For More Information Into Internal Democratic Party Politics
Posted by: bcgirl125 on Nov 16, 2007 12:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
which resulted in the election of these useless cowards, see the Counterpunch article,"How Rahm Emanuel Has Rigged A Pro-War Congress" by Joe Walsh.
http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10142006.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

POWERLESSNESS
Posted by: thelostsailor on Nov 16, 2007 2:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While the election is free, a disturbing reality lies in that fact that TV will decide the next president, just like most recent presidents. Fox News and the near equivalents, ABC, NBC, and CBS, have long ago decided who they like and the spin is only starting to rotate, here with the election so far away. Yes the country has been gutted and screwed by our government, but I bet we only have more apathetic fools watching these criminally-liable 'news shows'.

We keep a nice choir together here at ALternet, but unfortunately it largely preachers to the choir (WOuldn't it be great if Alternet had a news show on tv next the coroporate goon shows? Oh yeah, it has to be coroporate news to make it on TV...sorry).

But the majority (just like in Congress) are a bunch of brain-dead children who only pick up more apathy and illusionment from these television 'news takes'.

What we need is a new biofuel source- let's put most of the country in the burner/composting plant.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Groundswell
Posted by: Jeanne on Nov 16, 2007 2:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am amazed at the number of posts on this article. It must be some kind of indication of how deep and how broad the dissatisfaction with "our" democratic congress is. And how truly frustrated with US policy Americans must be. How is this not being addressed in our media? Clearly the corporate media has an interest in underreporting the depths of Americans' dissatisfaction. If it never becomes part of our "news" narrative, then election results which continue to favor legislators and politicians who support US policies will not seem so unbelievable. Voters will accept that the candidates they did not want got elected anyway by the narrowest of margins. Exit polling since 2000 has not synched with the vote count. I don't think this is because exit polls are inaccurate, I think it's because vote counting is "inaccurate." That is to say: fraudulent. Looking at the volume of conversation going on under this topic, I would venture to guess that we'll all be flummoxed and amazed and disappointed when Rudy is elected our next president, and congress goes back to being a Republican majority.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Groundswell Posted by: EncinoM
» You speak the truthy! Posted by: Coleman
» Truthiness from the Peanut Gallery Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Groundswell Posted by: CUnknown
The Function of the Democratic Party in the Political System: Part One
Posted by: chlamor on Nov 16, 2007 4:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Function of the Democratic Party in the Political System

The Democratic Party plays an indispensable role in society's political machinery. This doesn't mean it has any power, in terms of controlling the state or setting policy. It means that without the existence of the Dem Party, the US could no longer maintain the pretense that it's a "democracy." If the Dem Party disintegrated, the US would be revealed for what it really is -- a one-party state ruled by a narrow alliance of business interests.

In terms of defending the general population against the depredations of this business consortium, the Dem Party gave up the ghost in the mid-1960's. Their threadbare act as the "Party of the People" serves not to defend the well-being of the population, but merely to persuade ordinary citizens that within the official political system's framework, there's at least some faint hope for eventual progressive change. Their focus is not so much being on our side, as convincing us that they're on our side -- without the slightest serious examination of what that might entail.

The party's true function is thus largely theatrical. It doesn't exist to fight for change, but only to pose as a force which one fine distant day might possibly bestir itself to fight for change. Thus the whole magic of the Dem Party -- the essential service it renders to the US power structure -- lies not in what it does, but in its mere existence: by simply existing, and doing nothing, it pretends to be something it's not; and this is enough to relieve despair & to let the system portray itself as a "democracy."

As long as the Dem Party exists, most Americans will believe we have a "democracy" and a "choice" in how we are ruled. They will not despair, and will not revolt, as long as they have this hope for "change within the system." From the system's point of view, this mechanism serves as the ultimate safety valve -- it insures against a despairing populace, thus eliminates the threat of rebellion; yet guarantees that no serious change to the system will be mounted, because the Dems weren't designed to play that role in the first place.


Aren't the Dems The Lesser Evil?

The Democrats are not the "lesser evil;" they are an auxiliary subdivision of the same evil. To understand the political system, one must step back and regard its operation as an integrated whole. The system can't be properly understood if one's study of it begins with an uncritical acceptance of the 2-party system, and the conventional characterizations of the two parties. (Indeed, the fact that society encourages one to view it in this latter way, is perhaps a warning that this perspective should not be trusted.)

Any given piece of reactionary legislation is invariably supported by a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats. Does this show that the Democrats are "less evil?" If one focuses on the noble efforts of the few outspoken dissenters, it's easy to feel that the Democrats are somewhat less evil. But in the larger picture, Democrats invariably submit to what Republicans more ardently promulgate, & the entire range of official opinion thereby shifts to the right. Thus the overall function of Democrats is not so much to fight, as to quasi-passively participate in this ever-rightward-moving process. Just as the Harlem Globetrotters need their Washington Generals to make their basketball games properly entertaining, Republicans need the Democrats for effective staging of the political show.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Function of the Democratic Party in the Political System: Part Two
Posted by: chlamor on Nov 16, 2007 4:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democrats are permitted to exist because their vague hint of eventual progressive change keeps large numbers of people from bolting the political system altogether. Emma Goldman once said, "If voting made a difference, it would be illegal." Similarly, if the Democrats potentially threatened any sort of serious change, they would be banned. The fact that they are fully accepted by the corporations and political establishment tells us at once that their ultimate function must be wholly in line with the interests of those ruling groups.

Doesn't the presence of the Dennis Kuciniches, Cynthia McKinneys, et al "prove" that the Democrats are progressive? No. The Kuciniches and McKinneys are indeed significantly different from the Hillary types -- but there are compelling reasons not to get too excited about them, either. First, they are used by the party as a "Left decoration," simply to keep potential left defectors in tow. Secondly, the party power brokers will NEVER in a million years let the Kucinich-McKinney faction have any real power.

In other words, the very modestly-sized progressive Dem faction is cynically used as a marketing tool by the national party. They are dangled before your eyes to make you think that the Dems are the "lesser evil" (since the Republicans offer no such Left decorations). The existence of a few decent Dems makes no real difference in the overall alignment of the party, and they will never be internally influential. They are a distraction.


Can Progressives "Take Over" the Dem Party?

The argument is often advanced by progressives that they might be able to "take over" the Dem Party just as the Republican Party was supposedly "taken over" by the Religious Right and neoconservatives. This is wishful thinking, and ignores the actual history and character of both parties.

The Republicans were always the party of Wall Street & Northern manufacturing. The Democrats were the party of the Southern slaveocracy. When the national Democrats defied southern racism by passing the Civil Rights Acts in the mid '60's, the southern states bolted, destroying the New Deal coalition. The Republicans profited from this by adapting to southern tastes, values, & religious/cultural conceptions.

But this was in no way out of character for the Republicans. The far right was able to take over the Republican Party because that kind of alliance was always very much in the nature of the Republican Party anyway. It was compatible with, not contradictory to, the big-business nature of the Republican party. Forming an alliance with fascists, racists & religious zealots ADVANCED the big-business agenda.

By contrast, for progressives to take over the Democrats would be an unprecedented departure from the party's character. To understand this, one must first recognize that the sole Dem claim to being progressive is rooted almost entirely in the New Deal, itself a response to a unique crisis in American history. FDR recognized that to avert the very real threat of massive social unrest and instability, significant concessions had to be made to the working class by the ruling class. Government could act to defend the weak, and to some extent to rein in the strong, but this was all in the longterm interests of defending the existing social order.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Function of the Democratic Party in the Political System: Part Three
Posted by: chlamor on Nov 16, 2007 4:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before FDR, the Dem Party had no progressive record whatsoever; and after FDR, though the New Deal coalition survived until the mid-1960's, it did so with a record of achievement that was restrained compared to the 1930's. After passing Medicare in 1965 the party reverted to its longterm pattern, and since then, there has again been no progressive record to speak of. The party's progressive social reform was thus concentrated mostly in the 1930's, with some residual momentum lasting until the mid 60's. The party's "progressive period" was thus 1) an exception to the longer term pattern; 2) a response to a unique crisis; and 3) has in any case been dead for over 40 years.

The word "progressive" refers to the commitment of a political party to defend the interests of the working class (aka the overwhelming majority of the population) against the depredations of the ruling elite. Not only is the Democratic Party unable and unwilling to engage in such a fight, it is unwilling even to pronounce the fight's name -- "class warfare." Marx is understandably reviled by capitalists for his annoyingly accurate perception that the capitalist class and the rest of the population have a fundamental conflict of interest. Capital seeks only to maximize its return; return can certainly be enhanced by using the machinery of state to transfer costs and burdens to the weak and vulnerable; thus rule by capital is intrinsically inimical to the basic interests of the majority of the population. There is no escaping this reality.

American public discourse attempts to paper over this vexing truth with fatuous happy talk, such as, "By working together, we can make make things better for everyone!" This is a lie. When capital controls government, government is no more than a tool used by elites to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else. This kind of arrangement cannot possibly "make all boats rise" over the long term. Only the yachts will rise. If there is no political mechanism for opposing plutocratic rule, the strong will continue to squeeze additional wealth out of the weak until a) the weak become desperate and rebel, b) the weak are crushed and become permanently enslaved, or c) the strong begin suffering more from guilty consciences, than reaping enjoyment from additional wealth -- and therefore relent. (Very few instances of this last are known in recorded history.)

For the Democratic Party to even begin to serve as a vehicle for opposing the absolute rule of capital, it would at a minimum have to be capable of acknowledging the conflict that exists between the interests of capital and the rest of the population; and of expressing a principled determination to take the side of the population in this conflict.

A party whose controlling elements are millionaires, lobbyists, fund-raisers, careerist apparatchiks, consultants, and corporate lawyers; that has stood by prostrate and helpless (when not actively collaborating) in the face of stolen elections, illegal wars, torture, CIA concentration camps, lies as state policy, and one assault on the Bill of Rights after the next, is not likely to take that position.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» idealism vs. materialism Posted by: Coleman
» a good story Posted by: Coleman
Dems = Barney Poop Party
Posted by: amacd on Nov 16, 2007 7:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hate to continue bringing up this annoying and tiresome issue of IMPEACHMENT which seems to so bother our ‘sleeping-dog Democrats’ but …

Certainly the Democratic Party and its leaders have been held in low esteem for their gutlessness on the issue of responsibility for the war, which has now culminated in their failure to hold impeachment hearings.

It is clear that the Democratic Party is viewed as emasculated and having no real influence on Bush and Cheney. In fact, it could be said, without exaggeration, that Barney (the dog) has had more influence on Bush than the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party has had less influence than Barney, but perhaps a similar influence as Barney’s poop ---- in that Bush knows it’s there, is annoyed by the smell, and simply steps away.

Perhaps the Democratic Party, in deference to the truth in advertising doctrine, should really change its name to the Barney Poop Party (or BPP). This name change to BPP would also convey a somewhat foreign-sounding party acronym (like a Kurdish or Pakistani party) and better reflect the contempt and distain with which the Bush global dictatorship holds the Democrats.

Oops, sorry for getting off-topic ----- let me get back, ‘on message’.

Well then, in summary, perhaps the Democrats could actually grow some, impeach Cheney with his own ‘one percent’ logic, and thereby avoid falling the little bit lower toward being a party named for dog poop.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Collielady
Posted by: Collielady on Nov 16, 2007 9:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Surely, after spending several years drafting the great Constitution, the forefathers must have included a provision that allows for the removal of Congressional members who partake in this treason; in essence, they are just as guilty of not upholding and defending the Constitution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Collielady.elections Posted by: whealeydj
Parallax echoes....
Posted by: talkville on Nov 16, 2007 10:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"We are going into the Reichstag in order to seize our supply of weapons in the very arsenal of democracy. We are becoming deputies only in order to use its own institutions to undermine the values of the system. If the democrats are so stupid to reward us for this...with legislators' pay and free railroad tickets, that is their affair."

--Goebbels

Chilling words these days for anyone democratic at all. Germany, Italy and Japan were defeated militarily in WWII; certain creeds and ways of thinking were not. Although modified by a bit of Theology and culled of its most despicable and egregious aspects (race ideology and anti-semitism), there are chilling cold clouds wafting over the country today, gathering strength since the Reagan/Thatcher days.

National Security -- for who? Freedom -- for who?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Vote Schmote
Posted by: timemachinist on Nov 17, 2007 7:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can do without the nationalist overtones of "treason" charges. But the basic point is dead-on right: the Democrats are complicit in everything Bush Administration has done.

Welcome to the Empire of a Republicrat auction to the corporate and militarist interests that only know how to wage phony hypocritical wars: war on terror, war on drugs. When will a political movement emerge that actually has a positive vision for a better world instead of hysteria-mongering clampdown agenda?

Vote Schmote. The Republic is dead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

911truthblogger.com
Posted by: sommeyah on Nov 17, 2007 8:11 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We hope to convert, yet more open-minds to include: ATTACKS UPON US GEOGRAPHY, in your definition of TREASON...As well as to hold to account: George Bush, Dick Cheney, and their Carlyle cabal in the protection of enemies. We cannot very well hold to account, indigenous peoples in foreign soils, to de-throne their financial czars, who supported the WTC attacks on 9-11-01; but WE MUST HOLD TO ACCOUNT AMERICANS WHO HAVE PROTECTED THOSE (CORPORATE / INTELLIGENT ASSETS) enemies to our nation, via the bogus war on terror. Turn the witch hunt toward this premise: US GOVERNMENT IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION--FOREIGN, AND DOMESTIC.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Weakness of a Two-Party System
Posted by: Urgelt on Nov 17, 2007 8:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems the weakness of a two-party system is that it is too easy for wealthy interests to hijack both of them.

The reasons the two-party system perpetuates are: 1) both parties have colluded to establish legal barriers to the entry of other parties; 2) campaign financing laws slant power to wealthy corporations, regardless of superficial "campaign finance reforms"; and 3) consolidation of media ownership, abetted by legislative and regulatory cooperation, has placed most mainstream media into a very few corporate hands with an interest in maintaining the status quo. MSM has become a gatekeeper for special interests.

As wealth inequity grows, America is coming to resemble a bifurcated third-world nation, with wealthy, corrupt elites operating under legal codes which apply only to them, different standards of justice, physically separated from the people they rule. Democracy has become a fable. Naturally, the population is becoming increasing restive; it will take firm measures to keep them under control.

Election-rigging, domestic spying and intelligence gathering, militarization of police, and additional prison space are all headed our way or already here. You do know about the Halliburton-built emergency prison camps that are nearly ready to open, right? And the recently signed contract with Blackwater to staff them in an emergency?

Emergencies are easy to manufacture. An attack on Iran and the understandable public outcry in America against it will be all the justification needed to open those camps and start filling them with agitators.

Yes, the Democrats are complicit. They are as corrupt as the Republicans, for the most part, with few exceptions (Kucinich being one). A Democratic victory, as we learned in 2006, is no victory at all for anyone but the wealthy elite.

MSM is saying the 2008 Presidential Primaries are already over, before a single vote has been cast. Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee - the one candidate most in bed with the interests of wealthy elites and most beholden to them for her campaign contributions. Her corporate sponsors are the same people who funded Bush.

With Hillary on the ballot, I'll vote for the Greens. I've never done that before in my life; but it's about time for me, and the rest of us, too, to wise up. So what if the election goes to the Republicans as a result? There's almost no difference.

If we don't revitalize our democracy soon, we won't have one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WASHINGTON is a DEAD END
Posted by: stryder on Nov 17, 2007 2:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A last wake-up call…

The entire Crypto-Fascist system is completely broken and corrupt to the core.

The core is the "Federal Reserve" Corp made for Organized Corporate Crime to dictate policy to puppet Washington and a Fascist parrot MSM, "education" circus.

A Democrat and Republican fantasy front stand for nothing but deceit and betrayal to the highest bidder (those who create money out of thin air at the "Federal Reserve" Corp for accomplices at Big Banking, Big Oil, Big MSM, Big Military-Industrial, etc).

The whole cesspit has got to go or we will only get more of the same: more false-flag attacks, endless sham “war on terror”, economic dysfunction and above it all Crypto-Fascist rule by cozy parasites that use and abuse human life like a private torture zoo.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pelosi: Impeach her for High Crimes and Misfeasance
Posted by: robbrian on Nov 18, 2007 3:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Peolosi is the the one who should be impeached.
She has denied our representatives their right on our behalf to use a constitutional remedy, Impeachment, to judge the severity of high crimes and misdemeanors committed by Bush/Cheney.

Her refusal to allow the Judiciary Committee to hold impeachment hearings, is clearly a criminal act of misfeasance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some Call It Treason While Others Ignore It
Posted by: johnjmccarthy on Nov 18, 2007 3:37 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Greetings, Judge McKeown

Go to latimes.com and search for "9th circuit court state secrets ruling". The URL exceeds the max of sixty characters.

Please forward the following links to Judge McKeown re her recent decision in the States Secrets issue, above.

Here is but one example, in government's own documents, of why the face value of "national security" and "state secrets" has been abused in the past and should not be rubber stamped without questioning the veracity of the offering.

In the case below, the government successfully argued to close the criminal trial to the public because top secret evidence, in the form of witness testimony, would affect "national security" and the "further prosecution of the war in Vietnam." That translates to stopping the war in January 1968 and having 20,000 fewer names on the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington, D.C. because the government, read CIA and State Department and other members of the National Security Council, blatantly disobeyed Presidential Directives issued during NSC meetings, during war time.

http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id1.html

http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id48.html

http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id258.html

http://www.geocities.com/larryjodaniel/21.html

http://www.geocities.com/larryjodaniel/22.html

Bests,
John McCarthy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

dEMcaucus elects pelosi and Reid
Posted by: whealeydj on Nov 18, 2007 3:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
lobby your democratic representatives to replace them and get a pro impeachment leadership.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

2radical
Posted by: 2FedUp on Nov 19, 2007 7:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Behan, I agree with everything you say, except that the Democrats in Congress are guilty of treason. The penalty for treason is death. I wouldn't want to be the one to pull the lever to accomplish that, and I don't think that you would be willing to do that either, so my suggestion to you would be to lighten up just a little, because you lose audience by suggesting such a thing. Additionally,
Your statement that: "The "War on Terror" is a conscious and ingenious masquerade for the geostrategic pursuit and control of Middle Eastern oil and gas resources. The facts place this beyond dispute." my be true in your estimation as well as mine, but there ARE those who would dispute that statement who are in agreement with your overall and (justified) rage for this administration.

Your statement of identical (treasonous) fraud by well-meaning democrats pushes the envelope of credibility--

"The damage done by the Democrats' treason is equally great in prospect. Without exposing the lie of the war in Iraq and (not) acting upon the exposure, there is no credible and reliable way to stop the administration's insane intention of attacking Iran. The proffered rationales -- and the fraudulence -- are identical, as the Democrats stride toward complicity in yet another illegal and immoral war.

--and goes too far. Rep. Dennis Kucinich represents a "genuine concern for truth, for justice, for the rule of law and for integrity in public service." by his introduction of H.R. 333.

I too, am troubled by the fact that "roughly half the American people don't bother to vote at all" which doesn't give them much of a right to complain about the way things are now, but that doesn't mean that Americans "deserve" what they've gotten in the form of Bush/Cheney. I too, weep for my country. And, like you, am outraged by Congress's lack of courage, leadership, or demand for accountability, but to characterize this inactivity as treasonous is missing the mark, albeit not by much. Thank you for an excellent article. It should be required reading for Congressional members if for no other reason than to further impress upon them the historical importance and nature of their actions, or lack thereof.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 2radical Posted by: RWBehan
a site for sore minds
Posted by: c.e.stokes on Nov 20, 2007 5:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suggest you all go to this site. the liberation of realisim.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Treason is easy enough to understand
Posted by: Ian MacLeod on Nov 23, 2007 5:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A lawyer can twist words aeound, play with concepts, but at the end of the day, it's a simple concept: if you sell out the people you're supposed to be representing or protecting for profit of one sort or another, it's treason. Period. With industry and other crony appointees running agencies they're unqualified to run, or there's a clear conflict of interest; with business's profits having the highest priorities in the country - immediate profits, no matter what the present or future cost - in essence, selling the future for profits for a handful of people in the present - it's treason. If you want treason and the treasonous out of the picture, the only possible choice now is to get rid of about 99% of the current government; they're in it for the money and power, and nothing else.

Here's a quick example: Was Pelosi's "Impeachment is off the table" statement - almost the first thing out of her mouth - treason or not? Does ANYONE here not remember the handful of things - priorities - that put her where she is? Does anyone not remember that Congress still has - and has refused to use - the power of the purse? So - treason or not?

One thing that might be done: start publicizing every vote against the interests of the people, naming names and detailing votes in the home districts of the traitors, and make SURE that copies get to the voters. This means bypassing, somehow, the crony owned and operated MSM. Once people begin seeing the truth about what's happening, there's a chance voters will start recalls, and start voting in statesmen instead of profiteers. Without something like that, ain't nothing useful going to happen.

Ian

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement