Cliff Notes for Alito

Be wary of Alito. This from the Center for American Progress's daily Progress Report:

SUPREME COURT
Samuel Alito's America

ALITO WOULD OVERTURN ROE V. WADE: In his dissenting
opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Alito concurred with the majority in supporting the restrictive abortion-related measures passed by the Pennsylvania legislature in the late 1980s. Alito went further, however, saying the majority was wrong to strike down a requirement that women notify their spouses before having an abortion. The Supreme Court later rejected Alito’s view and also voted to reaffirm Roe v. Wade. [Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey,
1991]

ALITO WOULD ALLOW RACE-BASED DISCRIMINATION: Alito
dissented from a decision in favor of a Marriott Hotel manager who said she had been discriminated against on the basis of race. The majority explained that Alito would have protected racist employers by “immuniz[ing] an employer from the reach of Title VII if the employer’s belief that it had selected the ‘best’ candidate was the result of conscious racial bias.” [Bray v. Marriott Hotels, 1997]

ALITO WOULD STRIKE DOWN THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT: The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) "guarantees most workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a loved one." The 2003 Supreme Court ruling upholding FMLA [Nevada v. Hibbs, 2003] essentially reversed a 2000 decision by Alito which found that Congress exceeded its power in passing the law. [Chittister v.
Department of Community and Economic Development, 2000]

ALITO SUPPORTS UNAUTHORIZED STRIP SEARCHES: In Doe v. Groody, Alito argued that police officers had not violated constitutional rights when they strip-searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized only the search of a man and his home. [Doe v. Groody, 2004]

Earth to President Bush

16% of Americans feel it is essential to have a Supreme Court pick who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Earth to President Bush: 84% DOESN'T!

If President Bush wants to fix his legacy so he'll be remembered well, he'll run to the middle and actually pass laws. The Democrats would be all too willing to pass a moderate judge. Hell, Democrats are screaming for another Sandra... and by all honest measures, she leaned slightly to the right. There are more moderate judges out there than any type: Bush would easily be able to choose a judge who will be remembered for a long time; not because he or she would be conservative, but because he or she would be well qualified and make decisions of paramount importance.

Libby is Not Alone

This will be just the beginning of indictments, Fitzgerald will continue his investigation.

Furthermore, whether or not Fitzgerald ever attempts to indict him, it's clear that Vice President Dick Cheney was the one who released Plame's indentity. He should immediately be removed from office with Libby. I would say the Senate should be a beacon for integrity and investigate the matter further, but the Senate majority leader is likely to get indicted himself sooner or later. Can we expect him to lead the charge?

The only hope for America in getting the full truth and full justice for the improper actions of the Republican leadership is a vote for change in 2006. If America votes in democrats for at least one of the legislative bodies, official investigations can begin.

The Criminalization of Politics

The Republican Talking Points being tossed around the country includes, at the top of the list, the "criminalization of politics."

They think the criminalization of politics is when a Special Prosecutor goes after someone for a trivial crime - like perjury or obstruction of justice. Where were they when Bill Clinton was impeached for those very things? They didn't stand up for him and call it a criminalization of politics back then. It wasn't a criminalization of politics back then and it isn't so now.

Here's what a criminalization of politics really is: outing a CIA agent to get political revenge for revealing an administration's lies which helped lead the country into a conflict which has cost 2,000 lives. Tom Delay has been complaining about a criminalization of politics too - www.usatoday.com/news/Washington/2005-10-27-delay-letter_x.htm - but he is a criminal in politics. The criminalization of politics is when a politician abuses the system and breaks the law to gain political power, not when a prosecutor goes after these crook-politicians.

Wake Up MEDIA!

Harriet Miers didn't withdraw on her own! How niave is the media? Next thing we'll see is the media believing the President when he says some oil-rich, desert country in the Middle East is actually developing nuclear weapons and has stacks of other Weapons of Mass Destruction!

Harriet Miers Nomination Withdrawn

What it means.

The President lost his base. He has shown weakness. During President Bush's entire Presidency, he's lost a fight two times: over Social Security and now, with Harriet Miers. However, this time he lost his fight because he lost his base.

The President's base will be back. Don't be fooled, just because he lost his base now doesn't mean they won't jump right back in tomorrow. All it will take is an extremely conservative nomination who has a long written history. The base is itching for a fight with democrats, a fight they think they can win.

Democrats must be ready to combat such a more conservative pick. They can take advantage of Bush's weakness and must take advantage of it for the sake of this country's future. This country is a moderate country, only a small minority want a far right nomination. Democrats cannot sit back and allow the Republican Party to implode - it hasn't worked yet and it seems like it's all they're willing to do.

Bush is a lame duck. He lost his Supreme Court pick, a close friend and colleague. He lost over Social Security. He sat back and watched a major U.S. city be destroyed. He's allowed over 2,000 young Americans to die in Iraq, an unjust war that used lies to trick America into going there in the first place. At least one and closer to five of his staff members, possibly even the Vice President, will likely be indicted on criminal charges. Republicans can no longer frame the debate; America has finally realized all the lies and abuses of power the right has used to gain power. America wants a change and it's time Democrats stand up and offer them one.

CBS on the Coming Indictments

Good luck, Scooter Libby, you're going to need it. Welcome to Justice. Picture from CBS.



Read the whole story here: www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/26/politics/main981236.shtml

Here's a quote:

"Top Bush administration officials are bracing for possible grand jury indictments in the CIA leak investigation as early as today. The grand jury meets Wednesday and CBS News chief White House correspondent John Roberts reports the prosecutor has informed targets of the investigation of his intentions – and that can only mean indictments."

Indictments Coming!

According to Steve Clemons of the Washington Note, at least one indictment will be issued and it will likely be closer to five. A press conference will be held Thursday!

Read the full story here:

www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/10/25/the-washington-note-targ_n_9519.html

Big Oil's Recent Massive Profits

This just in... while you and I have been struggling to pay at the pump, the oil industry's profits are up 50%.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20051025-122641-3933r.htm

A month's supply of heating oil in my Boston-area home is going from slightly more than $300 to about $600 in the space of a year. Filling up my Honda Civic, which gets better than 40 gallons to the mile on the highway, is starting to eat up on my college budget. $10 used to fill half the tank, now less than 1/3rd.

Republicans want the oil industry to invest these profits into more refining. While that makes economic sense for America, it probably doesn't for the oil industry. Why spend money to devalue a product when people are willing to pay through the roof in order to buy it now?

Ideally, we'd have politicians stepping up and spending money for new sources of energy. Heck, Brazil doesn't even use oil to fuel their vehicles. If Brazil can do it, so can America. It would help thousands of working class farmers, such as the corn producers of this country. Alternatives exist now; it would be worth the effort and potential costs to switch from oil just to eliminate foreign influences over this country.

The Ship has Sunk

Vice President Dick Cheney was the one who leaked Plame's identity. His Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, likely attempted to obstruct justice by informing the special prosecutor that it was Journalists, including NBC's Tim Russert.

www.nytimes.com/2005/10/25/politics/25leak.html?hp&ex=1130299200&en=56e9496be92c9d2a&ei=5094&partner=homepage

It is starting to get very interested. Reports have already come out showing that Bush himself knew about the cover-up, or at the very least that Karl Rove and Scooter Libby revealed the identity months if not years ago. Yet, he went to claim that D.C. was a city full of leakers and that the identity of the leaker in this case may never be revealed. Well, despite all of Bush's efforts, that identity was revealed. It was revealed to be #2, Dick Cheney.

This leaves a lot of questions to be answered. Who will be indicted? It seems that at the very least Scooter Libby will be among them. Between trying to throw off the Special Prosecutor and sending a letter to Judy Miller in prison that can almost assuredly be deemed as an obstruction of justice, it would be hard to imagine that he won't be indicted. The question is, does Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald have enough to implicate Dick Cheney? It would probably be very difficult to go after the Vice President with the same charges of corruption - perjury, obstruction of justice and the like, that could be used to go after Libby and Rove. For Cheney to be charged, Fitzgerald would probably need some key piece of information that shows he used Plame's identity purposefully, knowing it was a secret identity, to hurt political opponents.

This is interesting...

Two days after Tom Delay was indicted, Wal-Mart gave a $5,000 donation to his fund. I'm so glad Wal-Mart is looking out for the benifits of their costomers.

I've been boycotting Wal-Mart for almost a year now; my mother just bought me a few things there when I ran out of college supplies and I was so angry I almost returned it all. However, I did give her pity because she was so nice to get those things in the first place, plus her furnace broke and may need to be replaced and she even decided she needed to shut off her cable due to the energy crisis. Heating costs in New England will rival some mortgages this winter. Believe it or not, these things are really related: corportations like Wal-Mart keep the Tom Delays of the government in power, who in turn have given the oil industry a free pass.

In any event, people owe it to themselves to look for alternatives to Wal-Mart. It hurts America with every product it sells. While it may be impossible for some to completely avoid it, people should do the best they can to reduce the huge profits they continue to give to Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart's support of Tom Delay is reason enough to join the boycott.

A Plamegate Must Read

Everyone should read this piece (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1021-31.htm) from www.commondreams.org written by former CIA analyst Ray McGovern. I had the opportunity to meet him on several occasions this past summer and can say he is easily one of the most intelligent people I've ever met - which shouldn't be too hard to realize after reading the able synopsis of the entire scandal that he provides.

Here's a few important paragraphs that can't be missed:

When introduced to former ambassador Wilson at the June 14 conference, I wasted no time asking him—rather naively, it turned out—if he knew who the former U.S. ambassador who went to Niger was. He smiled and said, “You’re looking at him.” I asked when he intended to go public; in a couple of weeks, was the answer.

Wilson then turned dead serious and, with considerable emphasis, told me the White House had already launched a full-court press in an effort to dredge up dirt on him. He added, “When I do speak out, they are going to go after me big time. I don’t know the precise nature the retaliation will take, but I can tell you now it will be swift and vindictive. They cannot afford to have people thinking they can escape unscathed if they spill the beans on the dishonesty undergirding this war.” (Sad to say, the White House approach has worked. There are perhaps a hundred of my former C.I.A. colleagues who know about the lies; none—not one—has been able to summon the courage to go public.)

Wilson’s tone was matter of fact; the nerves were of steel. Hardly surprising, thought I. If you can face down Saddam Hussein, you can surely face down the likes of Dick Cheney. Wilson’s New York Times op-ed of July 6, 2003, “What I Didn’t Find in Africa,” pulled no punches. Worse still from the administration’s point of view, Wilson then dropped the other shoe during an interview with the Washington Post also on July 6.

Consummate diplomats like Wilson typically do not speak of “lies.” So outraged was Wilson, though, that this bogus story had been used to “justify” an unprovoked war, that he made a point to note that the already proven dishonesty begs the question regarding “what else they are lying about.”

~Ray McGovern

100 Hits

I just wanted to thank all my readers now that I've broken 100 hits since I started counting. The speed at which I've done this is remarkable - I've been averaging about 8-10 readers each weekday. While that doesn't sound like that many, there are literally millions of blogs out there. I can't remember where I read it, but something like 30-40% of people on the internet keep some sort of a blog. A lot of people have more than one. It has been very exciting to watch that bar tick up to a hundred since I put it in. Just as exciting has been the fact that people are willing to read and respond to my entries: I encourage every reader to give me feedback and debate my positions. I cannot be a progressive if I am not willing to listen other to other perspectives and positions.

This site will likely change as more readers reach this website. I will do more to spruce it up. I'd like to hit over a 1,000 visits by my birthday in April! If anyone is a wiz at html and would like to send me some hints, I would greatly appreciate it! I can be contacted at U underscore R1Adams at UMASSD dot edu (I wrote it out so I don't get bots checking my website looking for email addresses as spam, sorry for the confusion). If any bloggers are reading and would like to offer tips or link any of my stuff to their sites, I would be thrilled!

My site will also change in content. As I get more readers, I'll try to also include more substantive information instead of all the latest information on Delay, Rove and neo-cons in the government. However, that will have to wait for now because of the urgency of Iraq, the Frist, Delay and Plamegate scandals.

However, in part through the efforts of millions of progressives, people like Tom Delay aren't getting away with it anymore. A warrant was issued for his arrest! The President isn't getting away with it anymore, even the media is starting to care about this country. Things are looking up!

Remember, especially as local elections near, to look progressive candidates. Look for candidates who see that over a million of American children are homeless and want to do something positive about it. Find candidates who realize that colleges are becoming too expensive for the ordinary student to attend. Find candidates who actually want to do something about the corporations who are willing to ruin America for corporate profit. Find candidates who are truly pro-life and don't see stem-cells as some big political game, only tools that be used to help people; candidates who value life by finding the electric chair morally reprehensible or insanely stupid (as it doesn't lower crime rates). If you can't find anyone who meets these noble standards, then run yourself!

This is our America too. It's time for progressives to have their say.

Bush's Sinking Ship

It looks like Bush is going down with his ship. Read this: http://nydailynews.com/front/story/357107p-304312c.html

Bush knew exactly who spilt the beans, even when he said this:

"I mean this town is a -- is a town full of people who like to leak information. And I don't know if we're going to find out the senior administration official."

The administration isn't denying the facts of the NY Daily News article, either:

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/19/mcclellan-walks-back-denial-of-ny-daily-news-story/

The Valerie Plame story could be the undoing of the entire adminstration, from lackies to Bush himself. If it is revealed that there has been a cover-up by Bush, including an attempt to spread misinformation and lies to the grand jury, then the administration as we know it is over. It will resort to an administration that is completely ineffective and must change face to save face.

Oh, wait, that's already happening:

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/19/AR2005101902291.html?referrer=email

Imagine, the President deciding he's a fiscal conservative now and vetoing his own party? Now THAT'S changing face to save face.

When Will the Nonesense Stop?

Again, the administration tries to tie 9/11 to Iraq. As the news gets worse and worse and the Presidential ratings become weaker and weaker, the President will continue to allow these asinine statements to attempt to scare the remainder of his base into continued support.

Here's the administration's latest attempt, on yesterday's Meet the Press (I can't believe I missed it!)

"The fact of the matter is that when we were attacked on September 11, we had a choice to make. We could decide that the proximate cause was al Qaeda and the people who flew those planes into buildings and, therefore, we would go after al Qaeda…or we could take a bolder approach."
~Condileeza Rice

Take the bolder approach and blame it on Iraq. Well, it is bold... but its also a complete fabrication of all truth. It isn't even an exaggeration - it's a complete lie. Oh, Condi, how can you continue to spread these blatant lies?!

Delay's Mistakes Lead to Challenge From Within District

Here's an interesting story from the Boston Globe today: due to redistricting in Texas that Delay forced through (with an illegal funding scheme that now has him indicted), a democrat lost his seat in Texas (one of several). That Texas Democrat has now moved to Delay's district, which is now a weaker Republican district because of the redistricting, with a plan of unseating him - and a good chance to win.

What does Delay think of it?

''It's amazing to me the strategy of Democrats. The politics of personal destruction isn't working. In fact, it's backlashing."

Tell that to the former Democratic Majority Leader Tom Daschle, Congressman Delay. At least that politician's down fall was a home in D.C. - bad politics - not breaking the law.

The Globe continues:

"But it is DeLay's own brand of cutthroat politics that Democrats hope will be his downfall. Texas had already redrawn voting districts after the 2000 census, but DeLay insisted that the state do it again, to boost the prospects of Republicans. He started by raising money to get a Republican majority in the Legislature. According to Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, that fund-raising involved the funneling of corporate donations to candidates, which is illegal in Texas."

Honestly, the redistricting should have been thrown out in court. I've never heard of two redistrictings in less than five years; districts shouldn't be able to become political games - people actually live there. Previous use of redistricting such as this destroyed chances for African American and minority candidates - are the same tactics to be used to target Democrats in general, state after state? Even the racists of the past didn't have the audacity to redistrict at a whim every few years. Welcome to the Republican's plans for a one-party America (and the end of democracy).

Why have Republicans accepted Delay's scandalous actions for so long?

"DeLay's redistricting plan worked: Texas elected five additional Republican congressmen last year. Without the Texas gains, the GOP would have lost ground in the House last year. Yet the machinations surrounding the deal clearly took a toll on DeLay's reputation, adding to an air of scandal surrounding him." (Italics are my own).

Read the whole story here: www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/10/17/delay_hustles_to_replenish_his_voter_pool/

People should do all they can to support Delay's challenger - Nick Lampson. Whether or not Delay is guilty of the indictments brought against him, he no longer belongs in office. It's clear that his politics are bad politics for America - Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree with that. What are Americans supposed to do to bad politicians? Vote them out of office!

People should either vote for the Democrat, Lampson, or find a Republican to challenge Delay. The country can no longer afford Tom Delay's stink; he threatens the very stability of American democracy and freedom.

Rove: A White House Divide?

It seems as if there are wide divisions brewing in the White House. Here's the gist of it, from AmericaBlog:

"HOWARD FINEMAN, NBC CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: That‘s the point of the lance of this whole thing.Right now, my sense, in reporting this, Chris, is that the Bush family, political family, is at war with itself inside the White House. My sense is, it‘s Andy Card, the chief of staff, and his people against Karl Rove, the brain... And that runs through a whole lot of things, whether it‘s Harriet Miers or Katrina. But it all starts with Iraq. And some submerged, but now emerging divisions within the administration over why we went into that war, how we went into that war and what was done to sell it. There are people are out for Karl Rove inside that White House, which makes his situation even more perilous."

I highlighted a few key peices. Read the whole story here:

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/10/nbcs-fineman-white-house-in-civil-war.html

Tearing Down the UN

I haven't posted anything about John Bolton and since there are thousands posting about Harriet Miers, I figure I'll post a little blurb updating America about another Bush crony - John Bolton and his progress in destroying the United Nations.

He's now seen it fit to stop the UN from updating the world on the atrocities occuring in Darfur.

Here's a quote from a Reuters story:

"U.S. Ambassador John Bolton blocked a U.N. envoy on Monday from briefing the Security Council on grave human rights violations in Sudan's Darfur region."

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticleSearch.aspx?storyID=205451+10-Oct-2005+RTRS&srch=Bolton

Of course, Bolton says that he's doing this in the interest of doing something about Darfur as opposed to talking about it. Well, that sounds good, doesn't it?

Maybe not.

"Bolton, joined by China, Algeria and Russia, prevented Juan Mendez, Secretary-General Kofi Annan's special adviser for the prevention of genocide, from briefing the council on his recent visit to Darfur, despite pleas from Annan and 11 other council members that Mendez be heard."

Well, maybe Bolton and his International Coalition of Extreme Violaters of Human Rights is right and everyone else is wrong.

However, perhaps talking about Darfur is exactly what the world needs right now? For one thing, most of the news from Darfur is outdated. It would be important to hear about any updates from Darfur and see how the situation has changed. Furthermore, the mainstream media has reported almost no stories about Darfur or the atrocities occuring there (www.beawitness.org). How can the world care enough to do something about it if it doesn't know about it? That's like trying to cure cancer without knowing how to cure it or what it is that needs to be cured. Clearly, the Bush administration isn't in the business of preventing - or in this case - ending genocides.

The fact is that while Bolton says he wants to do something about Darfur, the only countries that have joined with him in preventing these important discussions at the UN are Algeria, China and Russia. If these three countries are our Darfurian allies in stopping genocide, clearly we are no friends of the Darfur region in Sudan.

Updating the Karl Rove Soap-Opera:

This from the Washington Post:

"A source close to Rove said Bush's chief political adviser and his legal team are now genuinely concerned he could face charges."

Everyone should read the article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/06/AR2005100601092.html

You need to sign up for the Washington Post's website, but its free and they don't send spam (unless, of course, you ask for daily headlines).

Rove is going for his 4th appearance in front of the grand jury for Plamegate. After reading the Post article, I wouldn't be entirely surprised if Rove is indicted soon. I wonder how the President would react to that? Will he simply roll back on his promise again?

President Bush started by stating anyone involved in the scandal would be fired. Now he's stated it's anyone criminally indicted. What's next? Will Karl Rove be maintaining his duties as Deputy Chief of Staff from a federal penitentiary? Bush seems to think this is just a big game, but there's no envelope revealing Karl Rove in the library with a candlestick at the end of this one. Like it or not, the President will have to deal with the realities of the situation soon. If he severs Rove from his administration now, he just may make it through the last three years of his administration without calls from members of congress for his impeachment.

As much as I would like to continue to see President Bush make a fool out of himself, I have too much respect for the institution of the Presidency. President Bush is a disgrace to the office and he threatens the stability of this country. Despite my glee at his failures and my I-told-you-so attitude, I sincerely hope he rights his wrongs for the good of this country.

The Hillary Visit was a Hoax

LOL what a dissapointment! I was just informed that some club posted fake posters of the Hillary visit in order to, well, trick people into visiting some comedian of the same last name. While I was surprised that Hillary would come to our campus in the first place, I wasn't shocked; other so-called big names have come before (the past two years: Ralph Nader, Michael Moore and Dane Cook are just a few). I've seen Bill Clinton go to lesser schools. It would have been interesting to see Hillary speak, I haven't heard her before. I've seen Bill Clinton at a national student conference in D.C. for the Center for American Progress/Campus Progress, but never before have I seen Hillary.

I'm not sure whether I would have been impressed or dissapointed. I have a feeling that she's the type of candidate that will run to the center (or even right of center) to get elected, even if she doesn't personally agree with those stances. If that's the case, I hope she does it in such a way that she won't lose credibility if she's elected and reverses policies. Part of me would love for Hillary to become President, I think she has a brilliant political mind and would be effective, but I'd only support her presidency if she were to be a progressive. It's time people take on Republicans on health care and minimum wage and a dozen other paramount issues this country must face to remain great.

Delay is not Alone

One would hope Republicans would eventually get it, but they don't. Why continue to place shady crooks to leadership positions?

Tom Delay's temporary replacement, assuming Delay doesn't go to jail, is none other than Representative Roy Blunt. Who is Roy Blunt? Well, let's see...

-Roy Blunt's PAC to fund his campaigns, Rely On Your Beliefs (ROYB), is led by none other than Jim Ellis. Jim Ellis, coincidentally, was indicted for money laundering (along with Tom Delay) for his work with the PAC Delay set up that got him in so much trouble - Texans for a Republican Majority.

-ROYB has a long list of ethic violations itself: http://www.firedupamerica.com/system/files?file=blunt_consent_decree.pdf

-Finally, he is about as shady as you get. He attempted to sneak past a line item to directly benifit Phillip Morris, a company that his wife and son are deeply involved in. It was so shady, in fact, that even the Republicans eventually prevented it from happening. Here's the story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A41839-2003Jun10?language=printer

Suffice it to say that if Republicans continue to place these types of people into positions of power then the American people will turn on them. Scandals are not rewarded, especially when these scandals come at the cost of the livelihood of Americans.

The University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth.

This is the lucky site of a Hillary Clinton speech on October 11th and I shall be in attendence, hoping to discover whether or not Senator Clinton will be an asset or a risk for progressives in 2008. I'm truly curious.

Can she win a Presidential election? Despite intense debate, I believe so. However, she's weakened by the fact that she has yet to come out against Iraq. Almost everyone in the Senate made a mistake in passing the resolution for war against Iraq. I refuse to believe for an instant a single Senator truly believed the President would only go to war as a last resort. Even before important documents such as the Downing Street Memo were revealed, it should have been clear that the President wasn't giving the weapons inspectors or the UN the time and respect they deserved. People like Hillary Clinton and almost all of the Democrats should have shown a little political backbone and resisted the President - despite his popularity at the time.

Hillary Clinton should start a new trend - a trend of honesty among important Democratic leaders. She should go on Meet the Press, or a show like it, and say something like this: 'I'm sorry, under the political circumstances of the time I made a decision I have now come to regret. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq; there was no al Qaeda connection. It was a mistake to invade that country, a mistake I deeply regret. Democrats should have resisted the resolution we helped pass before the invasion, but we failed and for that I apologize. Now, it is important to start to a plan to quickly withdraw our troops from Iraq in a way that will help, not hinder, Iraqis.'

Until Democrats start to show some conviction and advance truly progressive politics, the people of this country won't follow them like they did in the past. Democrats used to have a significant advantage in the actual size of their political party over Republicans, however that advantage has eroded. Now, both parties operate at about equal parity in size - but not in power or resources. Democrats have lost many working and middle class citizens because of a lack of conviction and because they aren't advancing the policies which will help people help themselves. Republicans are the ones doing the talking and showing conviction and have gained ground because of it. (People should read "What's the Matter with Kansas?" if they're interested in this subject.)

I'll be interested if Senator Clinton can seperate herself from the current mold of Democratic leaders and somehow send a message that reveals hope for a better future.

Bush's Oct. 4 Press Conference

This is real time, folks. President Bush is speaking right now, taking questions on a sweeping range of topics. I'm going to address a few while he's speaking.

1. Race and economics.

One of the reporters asked what, beyond home ownership, the President thinks is necessary for African Americans to achieve success and if the President was dissapointed in the results of African American voters during the last election.

The President more or less dodged the issue of achieving results for African Americans, refusing the divorce home ownership's 'feel-good power' from other factors in economic success. However, the President did admit to being dissapointed that so few African Americans voted for him. Why? His reason being, at least the only reason he addressed in answering the question, was that he had elevated African Americans to positions. What kind of positions? 'Not just any positions, positions that matter, cabinet positions.'

Well, Mr. President, you are hallucinating if you think that should be good enough to earn a single vote from an African American. Just because Colin Powell and Condi Rice have important policy making positions does not mean you are a friend of the African American community. People don't care about a few token positions, what really matters are the millions of African Americans living in poverty. People don't care about Colin Powell and Condi Rice - people care about middle class jobs with benifits. Until you help African Americans recieve these jobs in large quantities, the Republican Party will never enjoy the support of the 90% or so African Americans who do not vote red.

2. Supreme Court Nominee

"I don't have to speculate her."

Well, Mr. President, can we speculate about her? Will you insist she, who has no record as a judge with decisions, actually answer questions asked of her during her hearings? I doubt it.

3. Iraq

"Iraq is part of a larger global struggle."

Congratulations, Mr. President. Because of your policies, Iraq is now part of a larger global struggle in your war on terrorism. If not for you, there would be no terrorist connections in Iraq save for a few in the Kurdish area where Saddam Hussien held no real power to thwart them (never mind that those few were enemies of Saddam Hussien, not friends).

When the President said Iraq was part of a larger global struggle, he said it as if that bolstered his position. Instead, it should mark a failure of his administration and presidency.

What does 2000 look like?

We all know by now that the Republican Leadership is turning out to be a bunch of criminals. It's all over the news - from Delay being charged with conspiracy to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist being investigated for insider trading (not to mention the fact that Judy Miller, the jailed NY Times reporter, admitted it was Karl Rove and "Scooty" Libby - Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff - who revealed CIA officer Plame's identity http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/29/cia.leak/). However, by far the largest crime committed by this government has been the invasion of Iraq.

To see how vast this crime is, look at this: http://theunitedamerican.blogs.com/Movies/2000A/2000.html

Almost 2,000 American soldiers have died. The number likely skyrockets if one counts all Americans in Iraq (if anyone has those numbers, please let me know). However, that pales in comparison to the 10,000s of Iraqis who have been killed as a result of our invasion. It pales in comparison to the thousands of lives this country has ruined in a region that already had a poor opinion of America.

Should it be any surprise that the leaders of this country - the Republican Leadership - has committed small crimes such as revealing a CIA officer's identity or altering Texas state politics through illegal compaign financing (thus helping to insure the Texas State House could change district lines to give the US House of Representatives an even larger conservative majority) when it endorsed, planned and campaigned for an invasion of a country of 25 million?