CommonDreams Refugees

The comments on the post below have told me a couple of things.

1) There are actually people who read this site. At least occaisionally. Wow!
2) Anyone who is critical of Obama and the Democrats is being booted off of the CommonDreams website.

The latter makes me thing that people need a place to gather and discuss. Its better if we gather together and stay in touch. While the forums at CommonDreams used to be a place to do this, it seems apparent that the new Democratic censorship is going to make this hard to do there.

I don't know if this site is the place to do that. But, I'm willing to help where I can. CD refugees are welcome to comment here. I'd also be willing to open up the posting privlidges here to allow others to write here if they are interested.

And one thing that could certainly be done is if CommonDreams refugees want to post links or email to stay in touch, this thread could be a place to do that.

But, I'm also thinking maybe its time for a new site. I might try to get something started. Maybe have links to articles on other sites, but with the ability to comment freely on that site. So, for instance it could have a link to an interesting article on CommonDreams, but then it could also allow a free and uncensored discussion of that article.

If anyone is interested, leave a comment below. Not only about my ideas, but with your own.

A new era of Democratic censorship

Its amazing how if you scratch a Democrat, under the fake out outer covering, they act just like a Republican. I dared to post some comments on the CommonDreams site that tried to point out that everything might not be as rosy as the Obamabots are saying it is in the glow of their victory. They tended to point out that Obama still supported the wars, was pushing the wall street bailout, and generally hadn't really promised anything 'progressive' during the campaign. And that he won the campaign with record amounts of corporate money in his accounts, topping the amounts Bush had run on.

Do that on a Democratic site like Common Dreams, and that gets you blocked and banned these days. The Democrats are as intolerant of dissent as the Republicans. That's going to be one of the interesting things to watch in the coming months, as all the 'progressives' start to wake up to that fact. Especially since the Democrats and Obama won't be enacting a progressive agenda and won't be following a 'progressive' foreign policy. When the true progressives start to raise their voices. When they try to do exactly what the Democrats said during the campaign that they should do and try to 'hold the Democrats feet to the fire.', when that colides with the little fact that the Democrats are as intolerent of dissent as the Republicans, then it will start to get interesting.

Progressives. Those who oppose the wars. Now is the time to act.

To all who oppose the war.  To all who really call themselves 'progressives'.  This is the time to act.
We can see the course of this election.  Obama and the Democrats win this in a landslide.  That's the big course of things and its set and its already in motion.
We are going to see an Obama administration with the Democrats in control of Congress.  We also know that the Democrats won't want to listen to us.  That they'll still want to continue the wars.  That they won't want to prosecute the Bush criminals.   That they'll want to give our money to their rich friends on Wall Street.  That they'll want to call us 'idiot liberals' and ban us from the room.  We know this from the Democrats.  We have seen this from them over the last few years.
How do we make an Obama administration respect us and listen to what we want?  We keep hearing that we have to be the ones to 'pressure' an Obama administration.  How do we do that?
The only language they understand is political power.  We need to show it.  We need to have every Democratic Representative or Senator looking at the combined Nader\McKinney vote in their district or state and saying  'holy cow!'.  The more votes we put on the board right now, the more we get their attention and the more respect we get.  By putting votes on the board right now, we show real political power.
Its a safe vote.  Obama wins this in a landslide.  The Democrats win this in a landslide.  The states 'in play' are traditional Republicans ones like Indiana, Virginia and North Carolina.  To even think about winning, McCain has to sweep every state where he's even within shouting distance of Obama, and then maybe even one or two more.  Obama and the Democrats have this one in a lock.
Spread the word.  Now is the time. If there was ever a moment to vote your conscious and vote for an alternative to the corporate parties, it is this election.  Its a safe vote.  Obama wins big regardless.  The key point for right now is that actually, the closer we make this, the better it is for us.  If the Democrats are holding their breath on election night saying 'oh my gawd!' while they watch the numbers roll in with state after state they thought was solidly in their win column instead becoming razor thin with big vote totals for Nader and McKinney, then that's great for us.  We want to give them a heart attack.  That's the only way they'll take us seriously.
Do you want to really stop these wars?  Then vote your conscience.  Register a political earthquake the Democrats can't help but feel.
Do you really want to protect the environment?  Do you really want to turn the tide seriously back against global warming?  Then vote your conscience.  Register a political earthquake the Democrats can't help but feel. 
We want every congressional  Democrat looking ahead to the 2010 elections while seeing a strong Nader\McKinney vote in their districts. We want each of them shuddering at what the prospects of an angry, progressive, antiwar, third party campaign in 2010 in their districts would do to their congressional careers.  Do you want to really change things?  That's how to do it.
Now is the time.  This is the election.  This is the moment to act.

Transcript of Obama's speech

I can tell I'll be writing a bit about Obama's acceptance speech. So, to be fair, here's a link to the transcript.

Obama's acceptance speech to the 2008 Democratic Convention

And since there are so many attempts to try to tie Obama to FDR, here is also a link to FDR's famous speech in 1932. If you read both, the contrast is striking. FDR used his speech to lay out the specifics of the New Deal to Americans. In doing so, he created a mandate for what he wanted to do once he took office.

FDR's acceptance speech to the 1932 Democratic convention

A political strategy for dealing with the Democratic Party.

Today, the left appears powerless. The Democratic Party has moved to the right side of center-right. And in doing so it treats the votes of the left as something it can take for granted. And it treats the left with outright contempt, referring to them as 'idiot liberals' when they don't realize there's a camera pointed at them.

But the situation is not hopeless. In fact, the political position of the left is actually quite strong.

The balance between Democrats and Republicans in the country is quite close. The last two Presidential elections have hinged on the results of just one state (Florida in 2000, Ohio in 2004). This means changing the outcome of just one state, and not only the one that finally decided the race, can change the outcome of the entire election. Changing the outcome of just a few Senate race, or a handful of House races can change which party holds the majority in those bodies.

What this means is that the Democrats can not afford to lose anywhere. Each party is struggling to hold on to what its got, and then win just a little more than last time from the other. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have any margin of error. And this is what gives the left power.

What the left needs to do is to attack the Democrats precisely where it hurts. Pick the races that are going to be close, and then throw concentrated efforts into third party races in those districts. And make it personal. When running against a Democratic incumbent, make it absolutely crystal clear that this campaign is being mounted precisely to defeat them for the actions they've taken while in office. Make it clear that this Democrat is going down because he supported the war, or because he supported telecom immunity.

The goal is to show political strength. That is the problem the left has today. It has shown no political strength at all in decades. Since the 1970's, it has mostly just meekly supported whatever candidate the Democrats had in the race. The Nader campaign of 2000 is the one exception to this on the national stage. And the reverberations of that can still be felt.

The Democrats will never take the left seriously until they know we can hurt them. That has to be the goal. The inflicting of pain on the Democratic party. Make it expressly clear that they've lost the say the Presidency precisely because the left was so mad with them because they wouldn't end the war. Make it completely clear that they've lost the majority in the Senate because they wouldn't oppose or prosecute the Bush administration crimes. Make it precisely clear to the Democrats that they've lost this election because they lost the support of the left.

The first reaction of most people to this would be, 'oh my gawd, that means the Republicans will be elected!' And, yes it does. But stop and think a bit more about that. First there's the very real question of just how much better the Democrats are than the Republicans. But even conceding that the Republicans can at times be worse than the Democrats, lets continue to think this through.

What's going to happen fairly early on in the next election cycle? The Democrats are going to come to the left and try to get the left not to do that to them again. Aha! Now that the left has shown that it can exercise some political power, it gets treated like a player in the game. Now the left is sitting at the table negotiating with the Democrats. And both sides of the table know that the left can defeat the Democratic dreams of power in the next election if it chooses to. So, what do you want to ask for? Because now by defeating those Democrats in the last election, you now get to ask for almost anything. And the Democrats will want to give it to you.

I know what I'd ask for. I'd try to get political reforms to open up the system. All the stuff the 3rd parties have talked of for ages. Instant run-off voting, campaign reform, election systems reform. Long term, that gets more for the left in terms of getting into a chance to really hold political power than a 'win' on any one issue. But, with lives at stake, I'd say getting an end to our wars from such a negotiation wouldn't be a bad thing either.

From where we sit today, its hard to picture the Democrats giving any of that to the left. But remember, after defeating their dreams of power in one election, they are going to know we can do it again in the next. We will literally hold their chance at political power in our hands. We can ask for anything we want, and suddenly the Democrats will be trying to find a way to give it to us.

So, while it may seem counter-intuitive, the real path towards change in this country lies with defeating the Democrats. It does not lie in helping the Democrats win, that only leads to more of today's status quo. The key to obtaining real change in this country lies in doing everything we can to defeat the Democrats.

And besides, we'd get to have some fun doing it. We'd get to support candidates who really do believe in our views. We'd get to run campaigns that really matter, and that are right in the thick of the action. And we'd get to retire from politics a few Democrats who really need retiring. Another benefit from this, we get to hone our own campaign skills by working with tough campaigns in tough races. Not only would that be fun. And not only would it be fun to get to dance on the Democrats graves for a change, but that's yet another way in which the left would come out of such a strategy stronger politically.

Democrats against democracy

Well, the one thing that is clear this week in Denver is that we no longer live in a democracy.

How could it possibly be a democracy, when the people are forbidden to talk with their political representatives? And that is clearly the message delivered by the surveillance cameras and the helicopters and the amazing numbers of police in riot gear. Our representatives have no interest in what we say, and they want us pushed as far away from them as possible. Our representatives don't want their lives interrupted by even a faint squeak of protest, thus the riot police have orders to keep any protesters out of sight.

And, as I occasionally watch bits and pieces of this farce of a political convention, that is also the clear message. What is the role of a delegate at a modern political convention? Apparently the role of a delegate is to wear funny hats. Apparently the role of a delegate is to dance in the aisles. Apparently the role of a delegate is to attend expensive parties from which the public is banned. Apparently the role of a delegate is to provide a backdrop to a giant photo opportunity. Or just to be the live studio audience for the television infomercial.

One of the problems is that I am old enough to remember when it was different. To remember when a political convention was the gathering of a party. To remember when delegates at times had more important duties than the wearing of funny hats. I am old enough to remember when a party used to gather and debate its platform, and the planks that made it up. To remember when it was the members of the party, gathered together once every four years in a convention, that decided such questions for the party.

At this convention, there is no room left for quaint notions of democracy. The candidate has of course long been decided before the convention. Even the quaint notion of letting the convention have a say in who is the vice presidential candidate has long been discarded as well. Note very carefully the way the vice president is decided before the convention even begins. Note carefully that the vote of the delegates is now just such a formality that the results can be announced a week in advance. I suppose there might still be the farce of a vote. Where each delegation chair will make some cute little line about their state before the formality of rubber stamping the decision of the party leaders. But this has become meaningless ritual. The real notion of democracy that used to underlie it is dead and gone.

That is very representative of today's farce of democracy. Decisions are made at the highest levels. At best the people might occasionally be asked to rubber stamp that decision. Another meaningless ritual that has lost all its real meaning.

Think for a moment about the farce we've seen in meaningless ritual of the primaries. At the surface, it at least looks like democracy. Voters going to computers to indicate their choice for the next candidate. But what choice were voters really given? Because, by now its surely obvious that at least one of the candidates was lying during the campaigns.

Stop and think a minute about what we've seen. The primaries began with one clear Democratic front runner. Hillary Clinton was running for a third term of the Clinton administration. The problem of course was that way too many members of the Democratic Party knew exactly what this meant. In the corporate media, the corruption of the first two Clinton terms is now described as Bill Clinton's famous problems in keeping the zipper of his pants closed. But that was never the true corruption of the Clinton years. The true corruption of the Clinton years was the way the Clinton's sold the services of the Presidency to the highest bidder. There was little that was out of bounds. They happily sold off America's economic strength. The trade agreements of the Clinton years were the death knell to the notion that America would build anything real and of value. Our manufacturing capability was sold off for a short term bump in the corporate balance sheet. Today's economic problems all trace back to that. We are a nation of debtors who don't produce anything of real value any more. All of our trade deficits, the falling dollar, the bubbles in the speculative markets, they all stem from this basic problem.

The Clintons were willing to sell anything. Our manufacturing base, our democracy, our freedoms. It was the 1996 Clinton\Gore campaign that tore the giant loopholes in the post-Watergate political reforms that tried to limit the role of money in an election. It was the 1996 Clinton\Gore campaigns that opened the door to the hundreds of millions of dollars that have flowed into first the Bush campaigns and now the Obama campaign. The Obama campaign has raised over $400 million dollars so far. And despite the mythology spread by the campaign, this hasn't come in $20 bills from concerned college students. Instead, that is corporate money that is flowing in through the giant loopholes that the Clinton's ripped in our campaign finance laws.

This was the problem the Democratic front runner had at the start of the primaries. Way too many members of the Democratic party knew exactly what another Clinton Administration would mean. They knew it would be what the rest of the world would call either a center-right or a pure right-wing government. That beyond a couple of litmus test issues like abortion, that a third Clinton term would mean yet another government of the money, by the money and for the money. A big portion of the Democratic party wanted something different.

Thus evolved the farce of the primaries where it appeared that the party would indeed be able to choose something different. A slick new candidate was presented, one who spoke of hope and change. Sure, he was awfully vague on what that meant. But he looked good and he looked different. He used the words 'hope' and 'change' so often that they became associated with his name. The candidate made noises that if elected he would indeed make changes to America's foreign policy and to its economic policy. He said he'd be willing to talk with our enemies, instead of just bombing them. He said he'd be willing to renegotiate the trade deals that have so crippled our economy and sent so many of our good paying jobs overseas.

So, the members of the Democratic party, in primary after primary across the nation, made the choice to go with this new candidate. They rejected the corporatism of the Clintons and instead decided to send their party and their nation in a different direction.

The only problem was, it was all a giant fraud. As soon as Barack Obama had the nomination in hand, he immediately started telling everyone that his entire primary campaign had been a giant lie. Suddenly the idea of changing our foreign policy was off the table. He would only talk to our enemies if his preconditions were met. Or do deliver ultimatums that precede the usual bombings. He pledged to ally his foreign policy with the same right-wing goals of the Cuban terrorists in Florida. And to make certain that America's interests were secondary to that of Israel.

The candidate's pledge to renegotiate trade deals like NAFTA were then dismissed as the overheated rhetoric of the campaign. And most telling, the same old crew of advisers and party hacks that had characterized the Clinton years suddenly coalesced around the new candidate. While the members of the Democratic party had voted for change, suddenly it was revealed that no change was possible. It was revealed that an Obama administration would look amazingly like what a Hillary Clinton administration would have looked like.

This is today's Democratic Party. Its primaries are a fraud, and its political convention is a farce. Today's Democratic party treats its members as people to be lied to and manipulated. Today's Democratic Party relegates its delegates to the role of dancing in the aisles wearing funny hats while the next speaker for the TV infomercial gets ready in the back room.

And if no democracy is allowed inside the party, there is certainly none allowed outside. What is perfectly clear today is that there is one thing that the Democrats are willing to fight, and that is democracy. A Democratic Party that constantly shocks its members by its unwillingness to fight its Republican opposition shows that it has no problems at all fighting the people of this country who still want democracy. A party that seems spineless instead morphs into a vicious attack dog should words like 'Nader' or 'Green Party' be mentioned in their presence. A Democratic Party that is unwilling to use the political or legal process to fight to defend its own votes in rigged elections suddenly is willing to go to great lengths to fight say the petition signatures that might put an independent or Green party candidate on the ballot. A Democratic Party that is too cowardly to fight the Republicans unleashes the riot police on any citizens who might dare to try to march in the streets in protest.

Yes, there is one thing that is certainly clear here in Denver this week. The one thing the Democratic Party certainly hates is democracy. From its lying candidates in its rigged primary campaigns, to its delegating the delegates to the role of mere extras, to the attacks on any who dare protest, the message of the Democratic Party in this area is quite clear. Democracy is not allowed.

All decisions are to be made at the highest levels. And they are to be made by politicians who refuse to even to talk to the people any more. If the people of this country say they want these wars to end, the leaders of the Democratic Party instead promise to expand the wars. If the people of this country say they want national health insurance like every other civilized western country, the leaders of the Democratic party respond with proposals to make it a crime not to buy corporate health insurance. If the people of this country say they want the laws upheld and political criminals prosecuted, the leaders of the Democratic Party respond by taking impeachment off the table and by promising not to prosecute the criminals of the current regime after they leave office.

Yes, the one thing that is most certainly clear this week in Denver is that the Democratic Party opposes the very idea of democracy. From the fact that its primaries were a fraud because of the dishonesty of its candidates, to its turning its convention from a democratic event to a corporate sponsored infomercial to its sending the riot police out to deal with any dissent, its all too clear we are on our own.

If you still believe in America. If you still believe in democracy. If you still believe in a free country, where our freedoms are protected by the rule of law and a series of checks and balances between branches of the government. If you still believe in the Bill of Rights, and its guarantees that we would be free of a government spying on its citizens and its guarantees of a chance of political expression, then its all too clear that today's Democratic Party is a part of the problem. Its all too clear that this Democratic Party has sold its soul to AT&T and its other corporate sponsors. If you want democracy in America, its all too clear that the Democratic Party is not the answer. In fact, the clear message from the riot police being ordered into the streets by the local Democratic mayor is that the Democratic Party is the enemy of democracy.

And the real puzzle of the week is why the American people seem willing to accept this?

Throw the dog a bone

There is a difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. When the Republicans create a policy, it entirely favors the rich and business. When the Democrats create a policy, it also favors the rich and business. But, the Democrats will also throw a bone off to the whichever economic class they want to troll for votes. It used to be the working class, but for the last 30 years or so that has switched to the middle class.

For the rich and for businesses, this means there really is a difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. With the Democrats they win, but they win bigger with the Republicans. The Republicans will give them the whole meal, while the Democrats toss a bone off to the middle class. Thus, whenever possible the rich and the business community will prefer to have Republicans. They want that last bone.

At first glance, it would seem that the reverse is true for the middle class. After all, the middle class gets nothing under Republican rule, but does get a bone or two from the Democrats. By this logic, the middle class should vote Democrat.

But that supposes that the fact that the rich and businesses will get the lion's share of the benefits no matter what is an unchangeable rule of the world. Here's where we reach the true irony of how the rich and the business community scream the words 'anti-American' at anyone who opposes them. Because the very basic founding concept of America is that 'all people are created equal, and are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights'. Because America is supposed to be the country with a government 'of the people, by the people and for the people.'

In a government of the people, by the people and for the people, decisions should be made for the benefit of all the people. Not just for the benefit of an elite group at the top, but for all the people. In a true democracy, the elite few at the top should have relatively less power because of the simple fact that they should get out voted whenever anything that is proposed that would benefit only them. Those that get caled 'anti-American' are usually being criticized for promoting what America really stood for in the first place.

Now lets look at that bone again. Is it really worth it? Because what America has given up to get that measly little bone was control over the whole meal. What America has lost is a democracy which governs to the benefit of all people. Instead, trade policy is set to benefit a few at a cost to everyone else. Wars are fought to benefit a few at a cost to everyone else.

In today's political system, we now have two parties representing the rich and the business community. What we need is to build a political movement that will represent everyone else. When we do that, the real choice will be clear. And the days when Americans only settled for a measly bone will seem unbelievable in retrospect.

What kind of extremists will we be?

"This is horseshit" by Cindy Sheehan

It is not if we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists will we be -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr

Love that quote. Probably need to put it up on the website somewhere. Maybe right next to the George Carlin line. :)

You know, I don't care if it's not proper for a Congressional candidate to say: "horseshit." I don't care if it is not a good "tactic" to get kicked out of a Congressional non-impeachment hearing that was just a bunch of horseshit anyway.

If people can't see how this nation is teetering on the precipice of financial ruin and dragging the rest of this planet down with us as we destroy our ecology, too…and if people don't realize how desperate our situation is, then I must say, that's horseshit!

That's Cindy Sheehan in the article referenced above. Go to her campaign website on that is linked over on the right side of this page to donate or volunteer.

Actually, I'd say its a cornerstone of the American political system, at least as it was designed by the writers of the Constitution, for a candidate to say "This is horseshit." That's the nature of a democratic and free society. The very strength of a democratic and free society is that someone can run for elected office saying "This is horseshit!".

If we restrict that in the quise of proper language and proper behavior, we've lost something. In fact we've lost something vital. Because it is vital that our political system be able to look at horseshit and call horseshit by its proper name.

When we see a political leader, like Ms. Nancy Pelosi, who is leading the country into war, torture, police-state spying, horrible deficits on a useless military, we need to have candidates who can stand up and call anti-American horseshit by its proper name. In fact its critical that someone stand up and say "This is horseshit!"

And especially when a political leader, like Ms. Nancy Pelosi, breaks the solemn oath of office that she gave to 'protect and defend the Constitution of the United States', and does so for only grass political gain, it is critical that someone stand up and say "This is horseshit!"

All of our American freedoms are based on the principle of a government divided into three separate and co-equal branches which all provide checks and balances against each other. The writers of the Constitution knew that there was a danger of one branch getting out of control and seizing too much power for itself. Especially the Executive Branch. These were people who had just fought a bloody and nasty revolution for nearly a decade to get themselves out from under a tyrant who had done just that. So, they were very careful to try to design for America a political system that would try to prevent the need to ever do that again.

Yet today, we see Ms. Pelosi and the Democrats destroying that system. And they are doing so purely for their own political interests. They are doing so for the small, crass motive of more political power for themselves and their party. America be damned is what they are saying. The Constitution be damned is what they are saying. If they think it increases the chances of a Democrat victory in the next election, they'll gladly toss it all away.

By the time the Democrats took the majority of Congress in early 2007, there was already a long record of abuses and usurpations by this current administration that demanded a serious investigation into whether impeachable offenses had been committed. The war in Iraq is one. Signing statements are another. Traveling around the world kidnapping people and disappearing them into secret prisons would be on the list. As well as torturing the people in those prisons. Unconstitutional, warrantless spying on the American people would be on that list.

Any one of these would certainly be a 'high crime' and worthy of impeachment. And each of these Democratic Congresspeople stood up and took an oath to 'protect and defend the constitution of the United States'. Given that oath, beginning an impeachment investigation would seem to be a mandatory and neccessary FIRST act of that new Congress.

Instead, the Democrats have violated that oath. They are destroying the structure of checks and balances the founders envisioned as neccessary to keep us free. And they've done so for only the crass political reason of trying to sieze power for themselves in the next election. At no point have the Democrats refuted all of the arguments leading towards impeachment. Instead they only talk about politics.

When Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid took impeachment 'off the table' long before the last election, they didn't do so for legal or constitutional reasons. They did it for political reasons. When they've consistently ignored the evidence that demands impeachment, they did so for political reasons.

If there is anything that should make almost all of the current Congressional Democrats declared unfit for office, it is this violation of a sacred oath and the abandonment of this sacred duty. They've declared themselves to be anti-American. They've made it clear that they would destroy America and its Constitution in order to obtain high political office. And that should be a clear sign that they shouldn't be given even the responsibilities of a local dog catcher.

There should be more than one of us saying, "This is horseshit!"

Self Evident Truths

Just because these words should always be said on this day. And the corporate media will stop at just acknowledging the right of the pursuit of happiness.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,
that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That to secure these rights,
governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends,
it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it,
and to institute new government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form,
as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Prudence, indeed,
will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;
and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer,
while evils are sufferable,
than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations,
pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism,
it is their right,
it is their duty,
to throw off such government,
and to provide new guards for their future security."

-- The Declaration of Independence

Gotta love those Democrats

Where do we begin?

Well, first there's the Dems getting ready to both rubber-stamp Bush's illegal, unconstitutional spying on Americans, but making sure that the telecoms get immunity for the crimes they committed by aiding this illegal spying.

Democrats Ready to Gut the Constitution to Protect Their “Constituents” — The Telecoms by tom Burghardt and found over at www.dissidentvoice.org

Then there's the Dems acting to fully fund more of the war and occupation in Iraq.
Democrats to back down on Iraq war conditions found through a link on www.antiwar.org

" Lawmakers are arranging to send Bush $165 billion in new money for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, enough to last for about a year and well beyond when Bush leaves office on January 20.

"It'll be the lump sum of money, veterans (funding) and that's it," said one House aide familiar with the negotiations on the legislation."

The article on the Dems allowing immunity for illegal wiretapping has this quote from the ACLU.

"Allowing phone companies to avoid litigation by simply presenting a “permission slip” from the president is not court review. This is immunity pure and simple because the companies are NOT being judged on whether they followed the law. A document stating that the president asked them to conduct warrantless wiretapping is not enough justification for violating the basic privacy rights of Americans. (”Facts on Senator Kit Bond’s (R-MO) FISA Proposal,” American Civil Liberties Union, June 13, 2008)"


When you read this, what you realize is that what is at stake is clearly and simply whether or not we still operate under the Constitution, or whether we live in a country ruled by an all-powerful executive that can do whatever he chooses. The Founding Fathers based their system of Checks and Balances on the belief that the Congress would work to protect its prerogatives from encroachment by an aggressive President. Instead we see a Congress that is willing to completely abandon its role in the law-making process and just give the President the authority to do whatever he wants.

Anyone who stayed awake in high school civics learned what the proper law making procedure is under the Constitution. A bill is proposed in either House of the Congress. It then has to be passed by both Houses, when it then goes to the President for his signature or veto. Afterwards, its the Presidents role to enforce that law.

The 'law' that is on the books from that process is very clear. Its starts with a Constitution that says we are protected from unwarranted searches. There was a big loophole carved into that law in the name of 'security' by the creation of the FISA act. But even that protected the need for a judge to review evidence to give a warrant, albeit by a secret court.

The President's role is to obey and execute that law. Its not the President's role to independently make a new law when he wants. If the President wants changes, then he needs to go to Congress and ask for them. And its deliberately not automatic and a protection of our liberties that the Congress might choose not to make changes just because the President asks for them.

What we've seen instead is the President just making up the law on his own. He wanted to have the capability to spy on Americans without getting a warrant. So, he just told himself that this was ok. Then, he went to the phone companies and told them he said it was ok. According to this Congress, led by the Democratic majority that pretends to be an opposition party, this is just fine and dandy.

The more I think about this, the more it strikes me that this is just shredding the Constitution. Its removing any protections Americans have against unwarranted searches. And it removes the basic checks and balances that allow all the voices of a democracy to participate in the law making process and instead just tells the President to do whatever he wants to do.

When the talk is of street criminals, we are told we need tough laws and enforcement as a 'deterrent'. What do we see in this case if we look at it this way? If the President decides he wants to in some other way to spy upon Americans or to take away other rights under the Constituion, if he looks at this he has to thing just 'sure, go ahead.' That's the precedent that's being set. Or, if the President is asking some other corporation to break the law, this now establishes the precedent that the President can do that.

And anyone who thought that electing Democrats would either slow this down or stop the war was just delusional. And its the same for this election. Voting Dem is voting for more of the same. If you want something different, its time to elect some different people.