Saturday, February 11, 2006
Manchester greets Bush
Friday, February 10, 2006
Avoiding impeachement and all are culpable. I think.
Visit DFNH for more. I haven't been kicked off that site yet... Nice.
RISE UP!!! The final days of the Revolution are just 9 short months away.
Wow, how time flies. It wasn't that long ago when I was saying it was 21 months away. Whew.
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Bush visits NH
MANCHESTER, N.H. -- While President George W. Bush spoke to a crowd of business and political leaders inside the Radisson Hotel on Wednesday, more than two dozen protestors gathered outside.It was 100 people at peak - as counted by a Union Leader reporter - not likely exaggerate. An organizer of the protest was asked about the 2007 budget:
"That will give so much money to the military while taking from food programs that feed the elderly," said Susan Bruce, of the New Hampshire Citizens Alliance. "It's just wrong."
How long has she been one?
A Brattleboro native is crossing party lines to lead Republican candidate Richard Tarrant's campaign for U.S. Senate.
Kate O'Connor, a Democrat from Brattleboro who headed former Gov. Howard Dean's presidential campaign in 2004, will team up with former Vermont House Speaker Walter Freed, the Dorset Republican, to advise Tarrant's bid for national office.
The last poll on the race, Rasmussen on January 5, had Bernie Sanders up 70-25 on Tarrant. So it's nice to see Turncoat Kate sign up with a sure loser.
If you read joe trippi's book the revolution will not be telesvised you will find that he bunted heads constantly with this women. Wonder who she was working for then?
Social Security Privatization... forgotten but not gone
Bush buried detailed Social Security privatization proposals in his budget. Can the surprise move jump-start bipartisan reform?
If you read enough numbers, you never know what you'll find. Take President Bush and private Social Security accounts.
Last year, even though Bush talked endlessly about the supposed joys of private accounts, he never proposed a specific plan to Congress and never put privatization costs in the budget. But this year, with no fanfare whatsoever, Bush stuck a big Social Security privatization plan in the federal budget proposal, which he sent to Congress on Monday.
His plan would let people set up private accounts starting in 2010 and would divert more than $700 billion of Social Security tax revenues to pay for them over the first seven years.
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
I spent a little time under the golden dome today - at the House Judiciary hearing on CACR-34, a proposed amendment to the NH constitution that would ban same sex marriage. Now, we already have a law against same sex marriage, and another that says we don't have to recognize civil unions or same sex marriages performed in other states. Some of our brilliant legislators (think Jack Barnes) decided that a constitutional amendment would be delicious in an election year.
Yep, if you want to inflame the basest of the GOP base, that's what you do.
The hearing was well run, and everyone was polite and behaving like grown-ups. The anti-gay crowd was not standing around out front with signs and ugly messages. The ugly messages were being presented in testimony by a few legislators and a few members of the religious community. On the plus side there were at least 7 UU ministers (including mine) present. The testimony being presented by our side was good. I had a brief chat with Mo Baxley from NH Freedom to Marry, who urges us to all keep contacting our legislators to voice our opposition to using the constitution as a way of hurting a minority population.
Also - president Bush is in Manchester tomorrow. Look for a certain northern hussy and her tribe to have a presence at Veteran's Park accross the street. Listen to NHPR for the hussy's radio interview with Dan Gorenstein. She's also mentioned in the Nashua Telegraph today.
Voice your values!
Gonzales: ‘I Cannot Give You Absolute Assurance’ That We Are Not Spying on Innocent Americans
during today’s hearings. Question No. 3 read, “Can you guarantee this program has never — either intentionally or unintentionally — captured communications of political opponents or journalists?”
RawStory reports that Sen. Joseph Biden made a similar request today, asking Gonzales to guarantee the program had not been used to spy on innocent Americans with no connections to terrorism:
BIDEN: Can you assure us, General, you are fully, totally informed and confident that you know the absolute detail with which this program is being conducted? Can you assure us you personally can assure us no one is being eavesdropped upon in the United States other than — other than someone who has a communication that is emanating from foreign soil by a suspected terrorist, al Qaeda, or otherwise?
GONZALES: Sir, I can’t give you absolute assurance.
BIDEN: Who can?
GONZALES: Certainly General Hayden knows more about the operational details of this [program]. What I can give the American people assurance is that we have a number of safeguards in place so that we can say with a high degree of confidence or certainly certainty that what the president has authorized in connection with this program, that those procedures are being followed.
Gonzales tries to kick this question to former NSA Director Michael Hayden. But as ThinkProgress has noted, Hayden has been asked this question on at least three occassions and ducked it every time.
John McCain is an ass.
First, Obama's reasoned and articulate explanation for why he is declining to join the task force:
I know you have expressed an interest in creating a task force to further study and discuss these matters, but I and others in the Democratic Caucus believe the more effective and timely course is to allow the committees of jurisdiction to roll up their sleeves and get to work on writing ethics and lobbying reform legislation that a majority of the Senate can support. Committee consideration of these matters through the normal course will ensure that these issues are discussed in a public forum and that those within Congress, as well as those on the outside, can express their views, ensuring a thorough review of this matter.
And now, McCain's response, which reads like the wail of a screaming banshee:
Dear Senator Obama:
I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere. When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership's preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions. I'm embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble. Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won't make the same mistake again.
While I go off to wash my eyes (which certainly need a good bleaching after reading that trash), please reflect upon the real purpose of McCain's "bipartisan" task force, which is to whitewash a purely Republican scandal. Maverick McCain is just pissy that Obama's not stupid enough to meekly follow along while McCain carries out Bush's promise at the SOTU (about the only Bush promise that has survived the 24-hour retraction deadline he's imposed on almost every SOTU proposal).
McCain continues by calling Obama a political opportunist (projection, anyone?) and claiming Obama isn't acting in the public interest:
As I noted, I initially believed you shared that goal. But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party's effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness. Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn't always a priority for every one of us. Good luck to you, Senator.
Obama, bless the man's restraint, sets the record straight in more gentlemanly terms than McCain afforded him:
[I] am puzzled by your response to my recent letter. Last Wednesday morning, you called to invite me to your meeting that afternoon. I changed my schedule so I could attend the meeting. Afterwards, you thanked me several times for attending the meeting, and we left pledging to work together.
As you will recall, I told everyone present at the meeting that my caucus insisted that the consideration of any ethics reform proposal go through the regular committee process. You didn't indicate any opposition to this position at the time, and I wrote the letter to reiterate this point, as well as the fact that I thought S. 2180 should be the basis for a bipartisan solution.
I confess that I have no idea what has prompted your response. But let me assure you that I am not interested in typical partisan rhetoric or posturing. The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you nor my willingness to find a bipartisan solution to this problem.
United States Senator
A freshman Democrat shows class, a senior Republican acts likes an ass.