Reagan is dead

Ronald Reagan has been dead for a while now, but we are still worrying about his would-be assassin, John Hinkley, Jr. This man has been locked inside a mental institution for over 20 years. I think we can breathe easy knowing he won't commit this crime again, considering the victim is taking a dirt nap now.

Why should we continue to spend our tax dollars on such a criminal? I say set the man free.

Memoirs of a Geisha

Okay, normally I don't do book reviews, but I couldn't pass up this one.

Arthur Golden's book, Memoirs of a Geisha, is a magnificent story of love, betrayal, jealousy, revenge...shall I go on? It takes place during Japan's expansion into the Pacific (i.e., before WWII) and during WWII. I always sort of knew what a geisha was, but really I had no idea until I read this book. A geisha isn't a prostitute, per se. She is a woman of necessity; she is an object of reverence by men who seek her company and fortune.

It starts out in a small, impoverished fishing village located in a remote part of Japan and ends on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan (quite a contrast)! As you read this book you are intrigued by the beauty of the geisha and her meaning for Japanese culture. They are born of the lower levels of society and brought forward to better themselves through hard work. A geisha is dependent on the good-will of men, who pay for her services. Of course, one might think these services are simply sexual in nature, but not in the sense of prostituting yourself for a one-night stand. It is so much more in-depth!

Memoirs takes you on a journey from poverty, to resentment, to opulence, back to poverty, and finally happiness and contentment for a brutalized and detached woman. Remember: you do not choose to become geisha, you become geisha because you have no other choice. This simple idea is really the thesis of the book, and my favorite line.

Where do I sign up? =)

Neal Boortz

Okay, so I'm driving down I-75 today and I tune in to this Knoxville station that was spewing this conservative, neo-Nazi propaganda, so I had to listen...for a bit, at least.

This guy's show, The Neal Boortz Show, is unlike anything I've ever heard in the United States. At first, I thought he was just your run-of-the-mill conservative who was ragging on the liberals. Boy was I wrong!

This show was more than gross. It filled my car and soul with hate and dread. I eventually had to turn it off, especially after the host (who wasn't Neal Boortz today, but I've heard him rant previously) advocated the use of nuclear weapons against terrorists. Further, he went on about how great the United States was for its use of the atom bomb which killed hundreds-of-thousands of innocent Japanese civilians just to "teach" the Japanese government a lesson during WWII (this is his joy in life).

I came home and found out how to spell "Boortz" by using my old friend Google. I found out he isn't a conservative, or even Republican, at all, he's a Libertarian. Libertarian, from Boortz's point-of-view, is one step from hoarding assault rifles and ammunition in a small cabin in Montana! It really made me feel thankful that conservatives are the majority sitting on the other side of the fence from me, not this freak! He's 100+ miles out of the American main-stream.

Here's the insanity I heard espoused on this talk radio show in a five minute--or so--timespan.

1. As I stated before, the approval of using nuclear weapons to solve our differences. (Sounds like instead of trying to solve issues in a constructive manner, we should just say "to hell" with everyone else and just nuke them.)
2. Executions should be put on "primetime" television for everyone to see. In fact, it sounded like this should be required viewing for all good and decent Americans. To make it worse, he said Americans should use a lottery system to see who gets to pull the switch and light the poor son-of-a-bitch up. This would be an excellent deterrent to crime in the United States, according to the show. I'm sorry, but that is just sad, which only shows deeper psychological issues for this man, simply based on his views. The death penalty is something to be loathed and ashamed of--a true relic of the past, which must, and will, be abolished in our nation.
3. The use of a "secret" police and military forces which will infiltrate our enemies and destroy them without regard to civilians. Not only was this to be used by American soldiers against foreign terrorists, but against the "bleeding heart liberals" in America who keep the military from doing its job. Sounds a bit too characteristic of Hitler's Gestalt staats-polizei (Gestapo). Someone didn't get enough hugs when he was younger!

The saddest part is people called in to this show and supported such bigotry and hate. I am 100% certain the only people who frequent such a show are bigots, wife-beaters, and those who truly hate America. It is a sad truth, but when you relish in others' misery and pain you are a heartless and cowardly person. It takes a GREATER American to stand up and question the direction of our government, to wit: military expansion and imperialism; rather than one who chooses to file behind a blood thirsty tyrant and accept things without question. America is an ideal, not an absolute. Its foundation is created on the blood, sweat and tears of people who made us truly great. It wasn't built on those who chose to take the easy road out, but rather on great patriots like Franklin, Jefferson, Washington, and Hamilton (just a small, small few) who decided not to stand behind a failing imperialistic policy of a benign dictator and blindly accept what what came their way. No, these patriots stood up and decided to fashion their own destiny without constraints and regard for precedent or what someone thought about them in Great Britain. They questioned their leaders and decided their answers, or lack thereof, had little merit, nor were they in the best interest of the Colonists. The moment we give over to the elite, or the mob, we cease to exist as the United States of America. We begin to unravel at our very fabric. Perhaps in the minds of people like Neal Boortz, our founders were cowards and should have been shot for not following the will of their king. Who knows, really?

It is scary to think radio stations would support such views and then broadcast them to the world! I am not a proponent of constraining the First Amendment, but such views and shows really make me take a hard and candid look at my beliefs in the freedom of speech, but in the end I will tolerate their right to say it; however, I will not condone it by listening!

In the spirit of the holiday...

Since it is the holidays, I decided that I should devote at least one moment to something good I saw. Today, I read a story about how this little girl was discovered in Iraq suffering from spina bifida. They state this girl would have died without outside help. The marines (I think) were able to render aid and as a result she is going to be sent to Georgia for an operation to save her life.

I found this to be a very touching story. Even if it did involve the military and Iraq. Perhaps, the media should devote a little more time and effort to showing us this side of Iraq. I know there is a lot a of death and chaos, but we mustn't forget the caring, openly-human side of it.

Enemy Combatant

I agree the time has come for the United States Supreme Court to decide the powers of the president. Can the president imprison American citizens extra-constitutionally? The answer is simply, no. It is dangerous for the Executive branch to assume such widespread powers for itself.

It stands to reason that a nation which values its commitment to the rule of law would be content to turn over "enemy combatants" to the judicial branch for prosecution based on the facts and merits of each individual case. I suspect, however, the president is not able to make a viable case based on the facts which creates a problem for him. He asserts he has the authority to imprison Americans for years without due process.

How bogus is that?

Wiretaps in Article II...WOW!

Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez reports the president has the authority to conduct covert wiretaps of Americans. I must have missed that one in American National Government. Allegedly, this right is in the Constitution, but it must be written in invisible ink (maybe like in that movie, they must be confusing the Declaration of Independence with the Constitution). I am sure the framers of the Constitution wrote "wiretaps" in there. Are we so dumb? Really, this is what happens when you put your best buddies and cronies in important offices. They become sycophants. Basically, they will tell you not to worry as your house burns down (what fire? relax! you're so pretty today!).

Now, let's look at the next BIG issue for King George. It seems his buddies at the New York Times have unearthed some new information which disputes Bush's allegations of limiting the illegal wiretaps to Americans talking to terrorists. Instead, he authorized the intelligence community to go very deep into the very fabric of our lives. He was looking for patterns to our behaviors by monitoring our communications. And of course without warrants! I have always stated my communications are being monitored by the Department of Homeland Security, out of jest of course, but it seems I was more right than wrong!

With this new information, coupled with other new information that the FBI monitors Muslims for radiation (without warrants) in their homes and mosques, will really drive the House toward impeachment. There is just too much here even for Bush's Republican lackeys to save him.

How the mighty have fallen! Maybe we're looking at a Hastert Administration in the new year.

Is Alito finito?

Well, we are starting to talk about Alito again. His nomination hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee is coming up next month.

Alito will have a hard road to travel since the NSA faux pas of recent. He seems a bit more conservative with a more extensively published paper trail than Roberts. He espoused the overturning of Roe v. Wade during his tenure with the Reagan Administration. This simple fact may be enough to railroad his nomination and send Bush a message: find more moderate candidates to fill Supreme Court vacancies.

Beyond the abortion question, he seems to have advocated the ability to "wiretap" Americans without judicial consent. A potential Supreme Court justice who advocates the strict DE-construction of the US Constitution has no place on the federal bench, at any level!

Let's vote "finito" for Alito. (Isn't that cute?)

House trumps Senate

The Congress of the United States seems to be turmoil over the USA Patriot Act. The House of Representatives refused the six month extension of the Act made by the Senate, instead they opted for a one month extension. The ball is not in the Senate's corner. What's next? Very interesting!

Will King George really veto the bill? I surely hope so, then the Congress can recess without a resolution to the Act; thereby, allowing it die a nice quick death!

Spineless Senate Stands Down

The United States Senate agreed to allow provisions of the USA Patriot Act to continue for another six months while they investigate and hammer out the details of the bill for short term consideration.

It only shows that members of the Senate are spineless cowards who are unwilling to say "no" to the demands of an unaccountable despot (i.e., George Bush). The Act should have been allowed to sunset on December 31 without further consideration. Only then can we breathe knowing our liberties and rights are secure from an intrusive government.

If George Bush was truly concerned with terrorism he wouldn't have invaded Iraq. It is merely a tool he can use to install fear and avert anti-subversive activities within the United States.

Has anyone ever heard of Stalin?

Americans/Iraqis can't handle it

Today, Saddam alleged abuse by his American captures. It would seem, from his allegations, he was abused and tortured. With such an allegation out there from defendants of such a trial, there is little credibility left for the Iraqi tribunal which is hearing these proceedings.

I believe such proceedings must be transferred from American and Iraqi jurisdiction to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. This is the only way Saddam and his host of co-defendants can ever receive a fair trial. As it is, the trial will last for a long period of time. I do not believe anyone in the international community can credit this farce as legitimate or fair to either side. Justice must be impartial and fair for all parties! I can't kill someone and then expect a fair and impartial trial conducted by my victim's family!

It's all just stupid! Are we really such blind idiots?

Cheney backs Bush; how does an amendment become, well, an amendment, Senator Leslie?

Dick Cheney seems to concur that George Bush is not accountable to the US Constitution. He says the powers of the Executive have been eroding since the time of Watergate and Vietnam. What he doesn't mention is Article II of the United States Constitution. Moreover, the powers of the president cannot be limited by something as silly as a constitution, according to Cheney's innuendo.

Here's my advice, liberal to conservative: Instead of railroading the system at every turn, simply use the system's processes in your favor. There is a little stipulation in the Constitution you may use at any time to do the things you want, it's called Article V, or the amendment!

Now, if you're confused let me explain it to you. I'll even help you with the verbiage, too!

First, let's draft our amendment proposal.

"The President of the United States (hereinafter, 'POTUS') has the unfettered authority to do any damn thing he pleases at any damn time he chooses. Furthermore, his choices and actions may be outside the realm of common sense and good judgment. He is not restricted by any provision of the United States Constitution, to wit: the POTUS shall not be prosecuted nor held liable on any charge for any actions which may defame or endanger the welfare of the State. In addition, Congress may pass legislation limiting the Executive from engaging in certain activities, but the POTUS will determine their relevance, interpret and disregard the laws of the United States as he sees proper. Furthermore, the Supreme Court of the United States may ascertain certain laws are egregious and unconstitutional, but the POTUS will act extra-judiciously at times he determines a clear and present danger to the integrity of his Office and the State, to wit: covert surveillance of American citizens in the United States, which may include arresting Americans and subsequently send them to secret CIA prisons in foreign lands without due process of law."

Now that we have drafted your proposal you must submit it to either the House or Senate (this is the simplest route). In each house, you must accrue 2/3 of its membership in favor of your amendment. We're not done yet! Next, you must submit your proposal to the states. Now, if you get 3/4 of the states to ratify your proposal, then sir you have a bona fide amendment to the United States Constitution! It will be officially called the Twenty-eighth Amendment, or by lay persons, the Bush Screwed-Us-Over Amendment.

Congratulations!

More on Wiretaps

"I just want to assure the American people that, one, I've got the authority to do this; two, it is a necessary part of my job to protect you; and three, we're guarding your civil liberties," Bush said.

1. Where does it give you the authority to do this in the United States Constitution? Where does it give you the authority to undermine the courts and give yourself unfettered powers?

2. How does spying on me protect me?

3. My civil liberties are guarded by illegal activity? They are guarded by allowing a super-secret agency to spy on me without due process?

When will we show George Bush he is not above the law? When will we show him he is not above the Constitution?

Osama, who?

As we continue our war on terror, it would seem we have overlooked the head of the organization that led to 9/11.

That was person was Saddam, right? Ha! Yeah, right!

It's been over four years and we have no clue where Osama bin Laden is. In fact, it is ridiculous. If we put the might of our military and intelligence behind finding this single figure, we would have by now. Instead, we were tricked into pumping hundreds-of-billions of my dollars into fighting some god-forsaken war which is completely pointless and illegal!

When will we finally wake up and realize we have all been lied to and made fools of by George Bush?

Hocus Pocus Quashed

I am happy there are still some Federal courts out there willing to take on the important issues and set precedents that protect us from acts which are improper and unconstitutional.

In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, the US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania struck down a practice which required teachers to preface their biology lessons with a statement which basically distorts their curriculum. They were required to profess nature is too diverse for Darwinism/evolution to explain; further, there must be a "intelligence" behind the creation of the universe, or basically life on earth in general.

The Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution forbids the state from endorsing religion of any kind. The policy of the Dover Area School District required religious contexts be placed on the study of biological sciences which directly influences and confuses students.

Religion is best left at home. It has no place in a public setting, whether that be a public school or county courthouse. Such acts only serve to flaunt individuals' insecurity with their own faith, which they erroneously force on their communities.

Oh Poo....

I watched Bush's speech hoping for a resignation!

What a let down!

Bush Going to Iraq for Christmas

George Bush contends the New York Times broke the law when it reported his ILLEGAL order allowing the NSA to conduct covert monitoring of American citizens. That is a bit of the pot calling the kettle black (or hypocrisy, if you're confused).

Now, he is going to make his big speech tonight on national tv, which will prove to be a tirade of his glorious achievements and accomplishments of bringing peace and democracy (through imperialism) to the Iraqi people. Surely, we must stand up against terrorists wherever they are, including the United States, by giving up our most basic liberties and freedoms (that's what I hear now). Through our war on terror, we have brought democracy to a nation terrorized for decades by a cold blooded killer (there's the rest of it). We will not yield, we are resolved to seeing this mission through, we will spread the gift of democracy this holiday season (there's some more).

Wow, it would seem I could be a Bush speech writer! I have all the tired lines memorized. Of course, Bush must think fast (or rather someone else think fast for him), if he is going to put this illegal NSA action behind him and beat his future impeachment. I believe he will hop on Air Force One, at my expense, and spend Christmas in Iraq with the boys and girls he sent to die. Of course, they will be highly selected and he will never venture outside the airplane hangar, but he will be in Iraq, right?

Bush is above the law?

Bush cites his use of a secret executive order giving the NSA permission to eavesdrop on Americans in the US as being legal and within his framework of powers as president.

Firstly, the NSA is barred by legislation from monitoring domestic communications and activities. Hello, Mr. Bush, this includes your little super covert executive order from 2002. There is nothing in the United States Constitution giving the president superseding powers over the laws of the United States, even during a time of alleged war!

Secondly, I think it is time someone gave Mr. Bush an accurate copy of the Constitution. He seems to be very much confused about his authority and responsibilities. He always refers to a copy of the constitution the rest of us have never seen. Is there a second, covert draft of the United States Constitution which was ratified by the Constitutional Convention?

I do not think so!

Republicans are in trouble. It's time for them to regroup or step out of the way!

Let the sun go down...

The US House passed a renewal of certain provisions of the Patriot USA Act during the previous week. This bill now has headed to the US Senate where it is not as popular, even among Bush's faithful.

I sincerely hope the filibuster agaisnt this bill will be successful and cloture cannot be invoked. I think this is truly one set of laws that I will be happy to see ride off into the sunset come December 31, 2005!

Bush going to the House?

Today, King George conceded the fact that he authorized illegal covert wiretaps of American citizens, in the United States, by the National Security Agency.

It would seem he hopes his admission before a national audience will candy coat his misuse of his powers and otherwise illegal activity. I do not believe it will save him in the long run.

With that said, Bush has his strongest support among his lackeys in the United States House of Representatives. He even managed to pass through another abuse of power, the renewal of the Patriot USA Act, which isn't getting the same acclaims from his fellow Republicans in the US Senate. We can only hope the US House of Representatives, after the 2006 election, gets the balls to bring articles of impeachment against Bush. I hope they also take into account the screw-ups and other vices committed by the Bush Administration and decide to draft these articles early next year. (This may save their own faces before the American public come election day.)

I think I could live (for a while) in an America where Bush is not president, even if the Congress is a Republican majority, which is another sad state of affairs, but you can only fight one battle at a time successfully.

Terrorists' Bill of Rights

This afternoon, Rush Limbaugh stated that by not renewing the Patriot USA Act, we are giving terrorists rights!

This conservative idealism has taken away my fundamental civil liberties and rights. I do not believe by allowing me, an American citizen, the rights and protections granted to me by the United States Constitution is going to endanger the welfare of our society.

Rush Limbaugh should go back on his drugs, or move to Cuba!

The Road of Bush's Impeachment

Finally, we are getting some teeth into the eventual impeachment of George Bush. He was accepted his role in misleading America about the WMDs in Iraq, which led to the war in Iraq, and he has now been accused by the New York Times for allowing the National Security Agency (NSA) conduct covert monitoring of Americans in the United States. Now, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is going to investigate these serious allegations of Bush authorizing the NSA to monitor and eavesdrop on American citizens inside the United States without proper court consent. Such an authorization by the President of the United States is a gross violation of his constitutional authority. If this proves true, Bush has acted illegally and outside the confines of his mandate as president, which can only lead to his impeachment and conviction.

Bush's abuses are finally catching up with him. When this happens the shit will hit the fan!

Iraqi Election in the US

This Iraqi election is fabulous, of course; however, I have some qualms about it.

Firstly, why are Iraqis who haven't set foot on Iraqi soil in 20+ years getting a vote in Iraq's parliamentary elections? If I am an American citizen and move to another country and take up residence there, I am no longer eligible to vote in local, state or federal elections. It's simple!

If I move to another part of Kentucky, I am not eligible to change my voter location for a month or participate in any election unless I am willing to travel back to the place where I am registered to vote.

Basically, if I move to Hawaii, then I can't expect to vote in local elections in my home state of Kentucky. So why are we allowing Iraqis who moved from their home country a voice in Iraq's government?

It doesn't make much sense, unless you are trying to influence the vote....oh wait, that's a whole different issue (or is it?).

People need to wake up and get real!

How about now?

George Bush gets more delusional every single day. Now he wants to compare the Iraqis to the founders of the US. Firstly, the founders of our nation were occupied by another country. So that would make us Great Britain, in a sense. Then they would have to rise up against us and defeat us in a war. So what is his point?

The Iraqis have nothing in common with our history. They did not decide to topple Saddam Hussein of their own free will. It took another country to make that decision for them. And quite honestly, I believe if they had a choice they would have kept Saddam! But the didn't have a choice, did they?

Next, we have gross reports of abuse in Iraqi prisons again. Now I ask, are we going to impeach Bush yet? It seems everything about this so-called war has violated the spirit of every international agreement since World War II!

I say this over and over, but if we impeached a man for getting a blowjob in the White House (and no one died) doesn't it stand to reason for us to hold accountable a man who squandered our nation's trust and swindled us out of billions of dollars for his own selfish greed and personal self-satisfying desire? Oh, and let's not forget all the thousands of people who have died, either, as a result!

IMPEACH BUSH WHILE WE STILL HAVE SOME DIGNITY!

Iraqi Civil War

I watched the Kurdish representative to the US today on CNN. He gives the impression that Kurdistan is independent of the central government in Baghdad. They are negotiating oil contracts for their region, independently. What does this mean for the Shi'a and Sunnis?

I believe Iraq will move into a period of civil war and independence of its parts after the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq (who knows when, though).

Patriot Act

I am a firm opponent to the Patriot Act from the beginning. Any time the government requests the right to operate outside the Constitution of the United States, then we should rise up and question the reasons behind such a request!

Of course, they decry 9/11. This excuse becomes less convincing each day. It is hard to use this fact almost five years after the fact. We are engaged in a war, which is the antithesis of what happened in 2001. We cannot compare the two in any manner. Iraq has nothing to do with the terrorist attacks on 9/11.

The Patriot Act overrides civil liberties of American citizens in favor of "Big Brother." I do not need someone keeping records of what I do. I am an American citizen whose liberties and rights are protected by a federal constitution.

I do not believe the Congress has the right, or power, to supersede these rights. They are constrained through charge and oath to respect and uphold the Constitution of the United States; therefore, if they work outside that framework they are acting unconstitutionally and illegally.

American Credibility

When we question the policies of the president, we are degrading our ability to wage war and giving the insurgents in Iraq more power?

The answer to this question is simple: NO! Opinions and opposition to such policies is not treason. When it comes to domestic and foreign policies, we cannot concern ourselves with the opinions of insurgents.

It is more democratic and American to question such policies! Republicans simply see it as attacking the president from a partisan point-of-view.

War in Iraq Going Downhill

Today, the polls show 68% of Americans question the direction of the American war in Iraq. It would seem they lack confidence in the fact George Bush has any clear plan for winning this war and leaving Iraq.

I find it ironic it has taken the bulk of American people this long to figure this simple fact out. King George never had a viable plan to exit Iraq, even from the beginning. He just wanted to go after Saddam.

Today, Iraq ONLY has 750 soldiers who can fight independently. This is over two years after the invasion of Iraq! This is simply unacceptable, to be modest! We must work quickly to ensure Iraqis can defend themselves in a viable way.

It would seem the Iraqis are not concerned with the defense of their own sovereignty. After decades of Saddam's rule, they are content to sit back and allow someone else to make the decisions for them. As long as George is president, I am confident this will be the case. His legacy looks more bleak everyday.

Only time will tell!

Condi vs. Hillary

Ha! Ha! I heard the cutest conservative radio talkshow on NPR this morning. The topic was who is going to stop Hillary from being president in 2009. The answer they came up with is Secretary of State Condeleeza (whatever) Rice. I literally about choked with laughter and had to pull over to let it all out without crashing!

I thought NPR was supposed to be serious, but they had a bit of comedy in their broadcast.

Firstly, there is no chance that Rice could take on Clinton. Hillary is a dynamo of political force. Hillary has the connections necessary to make a realistic bid for the White House.

Secondly, they made the accusation that Hillary must control every situation. It would seem that Rice could force her out of her "comfort zone" and Hillary would snap releasing anger and depravity all over the stage. What a joke!

Thirdly, Hillary has a secret weapon that Rice does not: he's called BILL CLINTON. I mean come on, who doesn't love Bill, really?

Fourthly, Rice has the look of a bulldog about to go AWOL!

In 2008, a Republican Rice against Democratic Clinton, there's no contest!

Bush's Delusions

Bush: U.S. to stay in Iraq till war is won.

Yeah, or until 12:01 pm on January 20, 2009!

Bush get a clue!

Women on the Rise for Elected Office

Last week, Germany installed its first female chancellor (for anyone confused, this is Adolf Hitler's old job). This is a giant move forward for women receiving larger roles in government. Germany, which has the world's third largest economy, has allowed the US to follow suit.

In 2008, I believe most eyes are focusing on Hillary Clinton to succeed King George to the presidency. It will be a curious spectacle to see if Hillary would accept such a nomination (and I believe she will).

Can you feel the love?

Saudi Arabia has pledged $1 billion for the recovery of Iraq's infrastructure. Isn't that sweet?

I believe it reduces down to a bit of "pay off" money. I am sure that most of the money they are going to donate came from high prices at the American gas pump! Of course, in business you want to pass on the costs of business to your consumer, which is exactly what the al-Sauds did!

Dissention in the Ranks

Finally, a handful of Republican senators who are willing to take a stand against some of Bush's foreign policies!

Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) stated that the White House should take a proactive stance against the abuse and torture of foreign prisoners. This stance has been advocated by Senator John McCain (R-AZ), and is supported by Hagel. Vice President Dick Cheney, however, supports the use of torture against CIA-held detainees.

I believe if the US had focused its attention on Afghanistan, Pakistan and al-Queda, it would have been much more successful in rooting out these extremists, who actually presented a real danger to the United States. Now we are stuck pumping a billion dollars a week into Iraq to fight a war that cannot be won! Logical, huh?

When will the US Congress hold George Bush accountable for high treason, misrepresentation and crimes against humanity?

In 2006, we must vote to return Democrats to the US Congress! That is our only hope for sanity and accountability!

Arctic Drilling

The US Senate has given its support for drilling in the Arctic region of Alaska.

Reluctantly, I, also, give my support to this measure. I believe the US must become self-reliant for its energy needs. Furthermore, drilling for oil in this region does not mean the creatures that inhabit this area will be disturbed. I do, however, believe there must be a strong support system for making sure that companies receiving authorization to drill do it in a restrictive way, which will preserve the natural beauty of this area.

In addition, to this measure, the Congress should give full attention and full funding to support research relating to alternate fuel sources for our vehicles, such as bio-diesel and hydrogen. I realize these may not be popular items, but they are pressing at this time, considering the price of gasoline!

Royal Visit

My, my...I seem to have a lot to catch up today!

I love the hype that goes along with Prince Charles' visit to the U.S. The people on tv say that he, and his new wife, does not have the fortitude and star-power he had with Diana. They report no one is watching what is going on and no one really cares. Now, come on! Just by reporting this story 10,000 times in one day supports the exact opposite!

Also, I was flipping through the channels and Larry King was doing a show just on them! I think a man, who will be king, needs a sort of subdued limelight. He mustn't create too much rhetoric or invite criticism. Finally, the "Cinderella" quality of his life is gone and the reality of his real situation can be understood.

Isn't that what is mommy always wanted?

Alito

I am missing Harriet Miers already. Like the pundits predicted, George has selected an ultra-conservative, Samuel Alito, to replace a moderate vote on the Supreme Court. Of course, this man will be in the fashion of Scalia and Thomas. If confirmed by the United States Senate, the Court can begin to unravel our nation in favor of the conservative Christian base, which Bush panders to (why? I just don't know!).

How sad!

Bush in Argentina

I love it! If George Bush had a clue, he would know how much he is hated, not only in his own country, but around the world.

Now I concede there are protestors and organized mischief anytime the president (any president, for that matter) travels abroad. But I believe the message from this experience is simple: George Bush you are a fascist! The United States is an imperialist nation, thanks to you. We conquer other nations with disregard for international justice and the welfare of the local people.

Bush is now in the world of Eva Peron, who blasted the wealth and opulence our nation has.

Bush you better get out while you can!

Bravo!

I say "finally!" Someone has stood up against the Bush machine and forced them to put on their brakes! I am talking about Dick Cheney's chief-of-staff, Scooter. Finally, a big fish is pulled out of Bush Pond to flop and squirm on the ground! I just hope his indictment leads to more flopping!

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky." That is the quote which drove Bill Clinton to impeachment in the United States House of Representatives. He was found liable for perjury by the House and sent for trial before the Senate, which thankfully acquitted him of any wrongdoing.

It seems that when your political party controls the Congress and the White House you can seemingly be above the Constitution of the United States. Basically you are free to do as you please, much like a dictator (sounds strangely familiar...i.e., Saddam).

I am not one to really predict the future (or am I?), but it seems to me if in 2006 the Congress reverts to Democratic control there may be a coup against Mr. George. He could be impeached by the House and tried before the Senate! What a glorious day it would be!

Thinking about a man who got a blowjob in the White House from his intern, and a man who lied to start a war that has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of Americans' lives, I'll make the man who screwed America accountable!

Miers Stands Down

Harriet Miers withdrew her name for the nomination as associate justice of the Supreme Court.

Who's next? An ultra-conservative? Probably...

Miers Controversy

It's time to recall Harriet Miers nomination to the Supreme Court. She is highly polarizing in both liberal and conservative groups. Now, George Bush says he won't release some of her documents because it might violate confidentiality. Who knows!

The main point is she seems too wishy-washy on the issues and who knows where she stands.

King George it's time to recall your nominee!

Justice for Saddam

Poor Saddam has been fed to the wolves. I am not saying he is an innocent man, but he deserves the same rights afforded other world leaders who have been struck down and are now charged with various crimes against humanity. Why do Serbia and Rwanda have international courts and not Iraq?

You don't see Slobodan Milosevic being tried in downtown Belgrade for crimes he may have committed. He was sent to The Hague to stand trial before an international tribunal of justice.

Why shouldn't all world leaders experience the same privilege?

Hurricane Wilma

In the words of Fred Flintstone: "WILMA!"

Defiant Saddam

I loved what I read in the Lexington Herald-Leader today about our best pal, Saddam.

It seems Saddam was ordered by the judge to state his name to the Court. To which Saddam ordered the judge to state who is was and what his authority is. He was then asked again to state his name.

Saddam stated, "As an Iraqi you know who I am." That would have been enough to send chills up and down my spine if I was the presiding judge! It was almost to the point of saying "I am the president, who the hell are you, you insignificant moron?!"

It seems Saddam has his faculties intact with the sweet taste for propaganda!

Terror in New York...Still!

Okay, I've heard about this terror plot these evil Iraqis have hatched against the innocent, benevolent United States. Now at first glance, I see that things are alright. The NYPD is in charge of this situation; however, I am reminded of the news conference last week regarding this situation, and something bugs me about it.

First, all the media outlets, like CNN, were trying to get the inside scoop on what was going on. The one thing I heard mentioned over and over was the fact no one seemed to be in charge of the situation. Sometimes authorities were confused if anything was going on at all and then others were clueless about who should be speaking to the media. That tells me a lot about the chain-of-command: there is none! Each federal agency and state agency are still essentially independent.

After 9/11, we are supposed to be so prepared for the worst. Well, Katrina, a hurricane that we had on our radars for days, couldn't adequately be planned for properly. Now how can we plan for something that we can't see? Honestly.

We would be living in a fool's paradise if we believe that terrorism is gone from our country forever; it isn't. I have no doubt that somewhere, someday they will get to strike us again. It is simply a waiting game. And sadly, when that day comes, we will be in the same boat we were in on September 11, 2001. All the different government agencies running around like chickens with their heads chopped off!

Of course, as a liberal, I don't say this much, but if you truly want to be effective in administering catastrophes you must downsize! Instead of adding a government agency, you needed to subtract one and consolidate its assets and write-off its liabilities. CONSOLIDATE! That's the key word!

The more people you add to the mix, the more confusion and shit you get. Sure, it may sound big and bad--Department of Homeland Security--but it has about as much authority as I would in a forest of wild gorillas. You have to hit your enemy hard and fast, and our enemy was never Iraq, which is precisely where King George's mind is focused.

Who elected that quack anyhow?! It wasn't me! :)

Hillary inducted into the Women's Hall of Fame

Hillary Rodham Clinton was inducted into the Women's Hall of Fame. If anyone ever deserved it, she does!

100th post

Wow! The big 100! I really need a life!

George's Mess

George Bush's big announcement was to tell us that Iraq will be the center of all terrorists activity if the U.S. pulls out its forces now. Let's see, who created this terrorist haven?

A- GEORGE BUSH!

Now we are stuck with George's hell hole for years to come!

Thanks America for electing a complete moron as president!

Strife among the Ranks

George's conservative base isn't even sold on Miers as the next associate justice on the Supreme Court. It must be her wishy-washy attitude. I read the questionnaire she filled out in 1989, during her campaign for city council. It would seem she is not opposed to homosexuals having the same rights as heterosexuals, they just can't have sex! That's too cute!

I think this woman and I could be friends, but not because she says people can't have sex--it's just that she can sit comfortably on both sides of the fence at the same time! That's so me!

Martial Law

What's up with George and the use of the military to solve all the world's problems. Now it would see if the "bird flu" ever takes out the police across the United States the military will be fully prepared to step in and do what is necessary to retain law and order.

Is the government planning on some sort of catastrophe regarding some mysterious virus? It would have to be one hell of an infection to require the use of the army, in my opinion. With that said, in New Orleans, the police force was incapacitated. We are now getting reports that the New Orleans police force even engaged in malicious activities during the days following Katrina. That wasn't good enough for the declaration of martial law! So, I think George needs a little more evidence to substantiate his request than a little flu.

Gas Woes

Well, I am getting used to the high gas prices. I was reading some complaints made by others on the Internet. I don't really see how the higher gas prices should really change your lifestyle. I mean I went from about $20/week to about $33/week. That's about $13 difference each week, but it's not going to change the way I live! That is just $52 more each month on gas. Sure, I could find something else to do with that money, but I guess I need to drive my car too!

Harriet Miers

Well, it seems King George has played the same hand as he played with Roberts. Ol' Georgie is giving us some nominees that have no pasts. They are relatively unknown figures that are emerging from the shadows. Frankly, John Roberts was one too many! If you are choosing judicial nominees that are relatively unknown to the mainstream, then how can we judge them accordingly. Harriet Miers is a lawyer who has worked closely with George Bush for over 10 years; yet, she seems a light-weight outside of the establishment.

Of course, I realize judicial nominees, as a rule, aren't going to be as well known as a presidential nominee, but we need to know who these people are because we are awarding them lifetime appointments to make decisions for us that will impact us for generations! That is a very awesome task. I have a feeling deep down in the pit of my stomach that George is nursing some vipers for us, much like Tiberius did with Caligula in ancient Rome. They seem pretty harmless on the outside, but once you turn them loose they'll bite you quicker than you ever thought possible! Nice and deadly, too!

It's already too late with Mr. Roberts, but we can throw the brakes on today and take a deep, hard look at this woman who is slated to be an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States.

Up to 3...

Today, Connecticut became the first state to recognize civil unions between homosexuals without a court order. I think it is a step out of the Dark Ages and the acknowledgement that all people are equal before the law.

As you can see, Justice is truly blind, and her scales are balanced; therefore, it is unfair to say that one group has a right that another group doesn't.

Only 47 more states left to go!

Rita and John

Well, we lived through another hurricane. I wonder when the other will stop by. I guess we need to focus our attention back onto the distant Atlantic Ocean for the first sign of it. I'm sure there is a tropical depression out there somewhere!

Also, this week, we have the Senate confirmation of John Roberts. I guess he will be the next chief justice!

When's George gonna give us his next nominee?

Republicans Abandon Fletcher!

The Kentucky Republican Committee today abandoned Ernie Fletcher. Fletcher had called this past week for the dismissal of Republican Chairman Darrell Brock, but today the committee voted that the chairman will keep his position!

This really was one of the final nails in Fletcher's tenure as governor of Kentucky. You know it's really bad when a political party's committee doesn't listen to its most powerful son!

Ha! Ha!

The Pledge

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

To me, even with under God in it, I felt like I was droning out some fascist salute! I have to say when I was in school I always stood but I never said the words. I was offended by the fact I was required to stand and swear my allegiance to something. It was nonconsensual!

I agree the words under God should be stricken from the pledge if everyone insists it be said; however, we could just strike the archaic practice from our schools altogether, and then we don't have to worry about its verbiage!

Period.

Bush's Move

Well, when is George going to give us his nominee for associate justice? It's only two weeks until the Supreme Court is back in session!

What's he waiting for?

Ernie

Interestingly, I keep my attention on the national scene, but I have been following the Ernie scandal. I have to make a comment now about it!

Ernie Fletcher stood for election in 2003 and won making him the first Republican governor in 2 decades. Now, with all of this responsibility Republicans allegedly bring, it would seem he has made a muck of his office! He set the platform that the corruption in Frankfort would end, but instead, he has now made former Governor Paul Patton look like a pretty nice guy.

"The 'good-ole boys' system" of government in Frankfort was supposed to have been an infamous part of our state's past, but it seems that Fletcher took this system, that he berated as a sin of the previous Democratic administrations, and abused it to the n-th degree!

Ernie, I remember your cute little commercial about the hot pants, and how Kentucky was stuck in the old days of corrupt Democratic governors, but now it seems we are stuck in the new, stupid days of a Republican administration that has failed the people of the Commonwealth. Get it right, Ernie! At least Democrats know how to keep it on the low-down, beneath the table where it belongs!

Personally, I voted for Ben Chandler, who I believe would have made a very good governor (even if he is a Democrat)! Out of all the previous governors of Kentucky, he seemed to have the most dignified vision for a new direction!

So, in November 2007, we'll elect a Democratic governor and return Kentucky to its rightful path--as a progressive state!

:)

Halliburton

Halliburton got some nice post-Katrina contracts with the federal government! Good for them! I know that Vice President Dick Cheney had nothing to do with that happening; just like those billions of dollars in contracts in post-Saddam Iraq!

How could you even think that?!

FEMA

Well, the Bush Administration has its Katrina scape-goat: Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Mike Brown! He resigned!

Bad man! Bad man!

Homeland Security

Due to the catastrophe of Hurricane Katrina, we have learned that the Department of Homeland Security is prepared to deal with any natural disaster like a bunch of chickens with their heads cut off. They were so disorganized and inept! And the damned storm was coming on shore for days! We saw it coming ahead of time. They had time to prepare for any contingency and they fucked up. They had absolutely no idea who was even in charge of the operations! And that should be the most simple of all things to figure out and plan. Imagine how disorganized and disjointed they will be when the terrorists come back for us again! I rue the day already!

Kudos to those in charge of keeping us safe! Thanks guys!

September 11

It's hard to believe that four years ago I was glued to the television. We were subjected to seeing those towers fall over-and-over on all the major networks. We really didn't understand what was happening, or at least I didn't.

Four years ago, I remember my mother waking me around 9-ish to tell me that we were under attack by someone. She said buildings are falling in New York and planes are crashing all over the United States. I remember scrambling out of the bed and turning on the television to see what was happening. For a few days, I supported anything George Bush did (it's funny now, of course); I was scared and confused!

Looking at where we are today, September 11, 2005, I am confused by the whole ordeal. I understand there are terrorists cells around the globe. I understand wealthy people despise us as a nation, our ideals, our beliefs. I understand these people must be dealt with for our own national security, through the partnerships of our allies. I do not understand, however, the war in Iraq. How did we go from nationless terrorist organizations, like al-Queda, to dominating a country such as Iraq.

From 9/11, we have become an imperialist nation. There is no doubt about it. George Bush has said himself that the United States will spread democracy around the globe. The irony of this statement is that democracy is being forced on these people. Democracy is a choice, through elections and policies that allow for a free and just society. Iraq is not a democracy. It will never be a democracy as it exists now. Sure, it may seem "democratic" on the surface with its elections and constitutional conventions, but inside the heart of the nation it still breathes and exists as an Islamic state. Such states cannot co-exist with the principles of democracy.

In short, the legacy of those thousands of Americans who died on this day four years ago is this: terrorism is alive and well! America is an imperial master now. We invade sovereign nations and force change upon them.

This is not legacy I want!

Roberts' Hearings

Tomorrow, the Senate finally gets down to business on the confirmation hearing of John Roberts as the next chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. It seems that my original prediction that Mr. Roberts would fill the vacancy left by Justice O'Connor was incorrect. King George better get himself in gear and nominate someone to replace Justice O'Connor. I have a sneaking suspicion that he may be "swaying" Sandra Day O'Connor to stay on for an extra term on the Court. But it seems that predictions, where George is concerned, come out a bit different.

I guess that is what happens when a lovable liberal tries to predict a conservative maniac! =o)

C-SPAN2 tomorrow!

Katrina Confusion

I think that the downfall of this whole operation will come from the inability to figure out who is in charge. FEMA was in charge, but it's not anymore! But isn't FEMA part of the Department of Homeland Security? Who knows, right? Now they have a Coast Guard admiral in charge of the whole thing. Who does he answer to? God only knows!

Chief Justices of the Supreme Court through History

I did a little research. I found out that the United States has only had 16 chief justices in its history. I also discovered that out of those 16 only 5 were elevated from the position of associate justice of the Supreme Court; the rest were nominated by the president fresh off the street. Now, I concede that I can't make much out of this fact. I can, however, point out that out of these appointees all of them were a tad older than Mr. Roberts, with the exception of two: John Jay and John Marshall. And anyone who is a student of politics knows that John Roberts is not in league with John Jay and John Marshall!

Here is a list of chief justices of the Supreme Court of the United States:

• John Jay, Washington, 1789-1795, age: 43
• John Rutledge, Washington, 1795-1795, age: 55
• Oliver Ellsworth, Washington, 1796-1800, age: 58
• John Marshall, Adams, J., 1801-1835, age: 45
• Roger Taney, Jackson, 1836-1864, age: 59
• Salmon P. Chase, Lincoln, 1864-1873, age: 56
• Morrison Waite, Grant, 1874-1888, age: 57
• Melville Fuller, Cleveland, 1888-1910, age: 55
• Edward D. White, Taft, 1910-1921, age: 65
• William H. Taft, Harding, 1921-1930, age: 63
• Charles Hughes, Hoover, 1930-1941, age: 68
• Harlan Stone, Roosevelt, F., 1941-1946, age: 68
• Fred Moore Vinson, Truman, 1946-1953, age: 63
• Earl Warren, Eisenhower, 1953-1969, age: 62
• Warren Burger, Nixon, 1969-1986, age: 61
• William Rehnquist, Reagan, 1986-2005, age: 61

As you can see, the chief justices appointed in the 20th century were all 10+ years older than John Roberts. The examples of chief justices being younger are all from the 18th and 19th centuries. This will all be interesting. I plan on sharing this information with my conservative US senators in the coming days. I know, too, that I will get that lovable form letter that starts, "Thank you for writing to share your opinion, but...." Basically, that's their way of saying "fuck off!"

One day!

Screwed Priorities

I have heard over and over the desolation and desperation in New Orleans. I have heard the horror stories of how people have gone for days now without any food or water. This morning I heard the story of the man who left his hellish motel room to venture out to find food for his child. He arrived at a Dollar General store a little way from the motel. Instead of the police out gathering up decomposing bodies and dealing with the gangs of thugs armed to the teeth, they were there protecting the Dollar General. How sad is that? Sufficed to say, the man got nothing for his starving family except a laceration to his head from the butt of a policeman's gun.

First of all, Dollar General and all those stores are insured to the eyeballs against theft and destruction of their property. So anything stolen or damaged will be replaced. If I owned Dollar General, a supermarket, a local market, or any type of store, I would say to the police, "Let them have it. There's no point guarding things that people need in order to survive. There's no need to cause any more harm and humiliation to these distraught people."

In the end, it will be these horror stories that will last far beyond the wake of Katrina's desolation. People denied life, for profit. That's the saddest story of all!

Think about it!

WTF!

Okay, I just confirmed through CNN that what the BBC reported is true. I guess you can't even afford to sleep anymore in this country. I guess holidays are no longer safe!

Who has ever heard of this happening before? Maybe I should do more research and discover that every chief justice of the Supreme Court was nominated straight off of the street. (But I really don't think so!)

What next?

Ummm...wtf?

Okay, CNN never said this, to my knowledge, but I just read on my old-faithful back-up, BBC.co.uk, that King George has nominated John Roberts to be the next chief justice!

That is simply preposterous! Who ever heard of a greenhorn getting to go from an unknown to the chief of the highest court in the land. Talk about animosity among your colleagues! Frankly, there is no way in hell this can happen. I was all prepared for Scalia to step up the ladder (even if he is the most conservative member on the Court). I am honestly outraged. The youngest sitting member on the Court was 15 years old when Roberts was born! I'd be pissing in my judicial robe!

Okay, maybe I should find out for sure. One place I could find out is whitehouse.gov.

Middle East Generosity

How about instead of the Middle Eastern countries giving us money for this disaster they give us a break on the price of crude oil?

We could fly those helicopters for a lot cheaper and transport those displaced people a lot more easily for half the price!

Think about it!

Scalia

I bet top dollar that Associate Justice Scalia will be the next chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Mark my words!

Crisis Management

I believe everyone (mostly) remembers the tsunami. I know that was over eight months ago, so it places a strain on the typical American to remember such great lengths of time. During this natural disaster, it was said the world would not forget. I believe that for the most part it has. I remember all of the relief efforts, but those are all now gone or quietly under the radar. There were governments all over the world that gave generously to help the survivors of this natural disaster, including the United States. There were gifts made by the private sector, including individual American citizens.

Today, we are faced with another similar crisis in our own backyard. There are hundreds-of-thousands of Americans displaced from their homes and communities because of last week's devastating category 5 hurricane, Katrina. I believe it is important that every American who can get involved in this relief effort. If it is from volunteering your time or simply making a monetary donation. Last night, I made my contribution by giving money to the relief efforts. Although, I cannot be there to help personally, I have given some of my personal resources to help the hungry and homeless people.

Everyone has a voice. Use it to help those less fortunate.

Change

It seems now that we are faced with even more problems than we were one week ago. If we can remember back that far, we will recall that Katrina was just a bleep on a radar screen heading toward the Gulf coast. The United States had not yet been plunged into turmoil and strife. Although, I believe, we have made great gains on the Katrina issue. The government has finally stepped up to accept responsibility for the lives of those displaced. There was only one candidate for the US Supreme Court. Today, we wake up to find that now there will be three confirmation hearings in the Senate over the next few weeks: two for associate justice and one for chief justice. Unfortunately, Bush will be able to leave his mark on this highest court, but I believe that the battle will be hard pressed. I even heard someone say that since the US was already facing a battle against New Orleans and the Senate should go easy on Bush's nominees so they can divert their full attention to the other crisis along the Gulf. That's very funny, actually. They are living in the Twilight Zone if they believe that. I know fully well that the Senate Democrats are not going to give Bush's nominees carte blanche. The decisions made the Supreme Court will be far reaching and have greater impact on this nation, over the long term, than any storm could! So, we will not go easy into that good night! We will rage against the dying of the light! :)

O, Katrina!

New Orleans--Fucked

Iraq: An Islamic State

I want to say thank you to Democrats.com for having the guts to publish the truth about Iraq. I have said this earlier myself. All George Bush's little big war has done is take Iraq from one extreme and deliver it to the other extreme! Is this progress? As I said earlier, also, it is easier to contain the rhetoric of one man, but it is not so easy to contain the rhetoric of a religion that transcends borders and earthly realms!

Now Iran and Iraq can be friends, at last! Thanks George Bush for your leadership!

"Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation. No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam."- Iraqi Constitution supported by Iran-backed Shiites and the Bush Administration (but opposed by Sunni leaders)

"Fortunately, after years of effort and expectations in Iraq, an Islamic state has come to power and the constitution has been established on the basis of Islamic precepts. We must congratulate the Iraqi people and authorities for this victory."- Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, head of Iran's powerful ultra-conservative Guardian Council

Iraq v. WWII

Iraq, let me compare thee to a world war fought out of necessity, against an aggressive terror....

Yes, George Bush can compare the war in Iraq with that of WWII. Of course, we are Germany in this conflict--invading sovereign nations out of our own self-invented right to bring order and liberate the weak and down-trodden from tyranny. Of course, Hitler said he was liberating the Germans in Austria; he was bringing them back into the fold. A mad man can always justify his follies!

That's the bottom line!

Transition of Power in Iraq

There is no end in sight. The Iraqis can't seem to hash out their new constitution. I believe the U.S. will have to intervene (imagine that) and tell them what to do.

Today I was just wondering how many people actually know who the current president of Iraq is? How engaged are we as a nation on this war? All we can see are the dark clouds on the horizon and they make us apathetic to the whole situation, which is bad for us all in the long run!

What the hell

Now I am being spammed in my blog suddenly. What devious mastermind is behind this?!

Haha! Someone has a lot of spare time on their hands.

September Agenda

The Senate calendar for September 2005:

1. Explain the steady rise in the price of petroleum;
2. Defeat the nomination of a conservative fanatic to the Supreme Court.

(Something like that, yeah!)

Iraq's Constitutional Theocracy

Let's review--

Saddam=Tyranny
Theocracy=BIGGER Tyranny

Wow! It would seem that Iraq just traded one evil for another. The Iraqis delayed their constitution to determine the role Islam would play in their government. Religion has no part in democracy! So, the United States just created an even larger monster in the Middle East. Is anyone familiar with Iran?

In essence, a man can't live forever; therefore, the cult surrounding Saddam was temporary. Then another person much like him would step up and fill his vacancy. On the other hand, a religion is not so temporary. It transcends human lifetimes, and it is must harder to control! DUH!

Let's just wait a few more years and get acquainted with the Islamic Revolutionary Republic of Iraq. Iran and Iraq side-by-side! I've got an idea: maybe they can unify!

Senate Takes on BIG Gas

It's about time! The United States has decided to convene hearings regarding the inflation of petroleum over recent months.

I just wonder if it will amount to anything! We'll keep watching!

Bush's Neighbors' Feud

I love this story about Bush's neighbors getting their feathers all flustered over the protestors outside of Bush's Texas ranch.

Now, I bet some money on the fact that it's not his neighbors wanting to fight these people, but in fact, it's Bush who is using his neighbors to lodge complaints about these people.

Even Bush knows that if he directly attacks this mother who lost her son in Iraq, he will be characterized as a heartless son-of-a-bitch! (Which he is!)

November 4, 2008

I can't wait for 2008 when we get rid of the Saudi-oil-loving-wanna-be-cowboy-joker George W. Bush.

I am going to vote for Hillary. I am pretty sure that she will run for president in 2008. This might be the first time I vote for a president that actually gets to move into the White House!

Goals for 2008 include:

• Complete removal of American armed forces from Iraq
• Initiation of a United Nations-led peacekeeping force, if needed (I honestly can't ever see Iraq being independently democratic)
• Stabilizing the economy by provided modest tax incentives for the middle class and tax breaks for small business owners
• Prescription drug plan for senior citizens where the government picks up all the tab
• And of course...less reliance on Saudi oil. :)

Hey, I'm goal oriented and a die-hard liberal...so back off!

I'm coming up for election in 2010!

What morons!

Now I have heard it all!

It would seem that two of the jurors in Michael Jackson's trial regret their decision to acquit him.

Ummm...according to the AP article two of the bitchy jurors had originally voted to convict Michael Jackson. But it would seem that they amended their decision for whatever reason. Now, if I were on that jury and then suddenly had a change of heart and then lived to regret it, I would keep it all to myself. There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING they can do now, so what's the point? It would also seem that they have some book deals in the works, so maybe they want to sell a book or even distinguish themselves from the other jurors.

I just don't understand what some people want! Simply, the former jurors in this case are morons!

Energy Bill

One good thing to come from the Congress and George Bush in a long time is the modification to the daylight saving time.

I am a bit giddy about the fact that my clock won't be moving back and forth so much in 2007. I have heard lots of opinions for and against the change. Actually, I promote that we adopt the "summer" time all year long! Now that is a bit radical, but I believe that extra time in the evening is much better than it being daylight at 5am when I'm asleep. Now I concede that I am serving my own personal interest, but isn't everyone?

I believe there will be a day when time changes will be abolished. It is difficult for people to acclimate to a new time. I know that I always feel bad when it comes time to change the clock. Either I am getting up later or earlier than I am used to. Besides, there is nothing more depressing than night coming at 5pm in winter! Everyone has to agree with that!

I am pro-sunlight!

Gassy Gas

The price of gas is still going up. We are not up to $63+ a barrel! When will it ever stop? I will tell you.

Sure the United States utilizes 20 million barrels of crude on a day-to-day basis with the vast majority of it coming from foreign sources, but that doesn't mean we have to be at the mercy of our suppliers.

The U.S. has massive amounts of oil in reserve. I suggest that we release a percentage of this oil onto our market to complement our daily domestic production, which should drive down the price of oil on the market! I believe it will be a signal to foreign producers, such as Saudi Arabia, that without the American market they will lose massive amounts of profit. Currently, we have a president whose primary focus is large business, which includes the oil industry. We also find example-after-example of how the president has "special" connections to the Saudi royal family. How biased is that? So it is any wonder that the price of oil is skyrocketing on an almost daily basis with King George in the White House? I think not!

Once upon a time....

In the beginning, there was chaos and idealism: there was no constitution. The interdependence of sovereign states weighed heavily on the success of the American war of independence from its mother, Great Britain. A group of aristocratic men had met in the summer of 1776 and decided the fate of their own lands was best represented by themselves. Their king had not heard them, his governors shunned them, but in the end he could not drown out their distant pleas represented by the bayonet, and the bloody battlefields of a once compliant colony gone badly wrong. From this seeming anarchy rose a phoenix of Herculean proportions; from the fire rose a nation forged by blood, brute, and determination, unlike any the world had ever seen. Thirteen confederated colonies sought their right to exist and earned that right through their own design. They were no longer reliant on their mother, they had proved their own right to existence in the wild. A proud network of educated men set out to define the role of a nation that would exist for centuries beyond their lifetimes. On July 4, 1776, the United States was born.

Our Constitution was unlike anything ever conceived by human intelligence. It was a pact between citizen and government. It was a bond setting the boundaries of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Every citizen was entitled to live and die as he or she saw fit. It was the duty of their government to make certain this right was protected by all means necessary. Of course, there were many ideas of how this constitution would be outlined. There were disagreements, concessions, but finally a draft was adopted by the Constitutional Convention. Now, there existed explicit rights and liberties of the new nation's people. There were clear roles for different aspects of the government's function, such as representation and judicial matters. The government was free of any religion and was adherent that it would never adopt laws regarding the institution. The judiciary was the final judge of whether the laws created by Congress met the tests set by the Constitution. An executive was given distinct authority to oversee the laws of the United States were properly enforced. The role of the United States' government has changed, but within the confines of the same constitution given life over 200 years ago.

Is the Constitution of the United States a static or living document? Can it bend with the will of the people or is it rigid and inflexible? The answer is simple: the Constitution of the United States is a living document. It has the ability to change and modify itself through amendments. Amendments to its verbiage and rights. These are enacted through the will of the people, through majorities in the Congress and their respective state legislatures. The Constitution, however, cannot bend toward the will of one individual. It is not meant to represent that popular sentiments of the day. If we allow one person to dominate the course of our nation, then we, as citizens, must take the Constitution and rip it into small pieces; thereby, delivering ourselves to the rule of tyranny on July 3, 1776.

The Adopted Babies Scandal

Wow! Justice-wannabe Roberts' adopted, white-skinned kids from Latin America are now part of the debate over his qualifications. It is soooooo freakin' funny that a CONSERVATIVE radio talk show referred to his adopted children as "white-skinned," which is fueling a controversy over how you could get such children in Latin America. Fortunately, he stopped short of calling them simply "them Mexicans."

That simply shows how racist conservatives are! Get a grip!

B & B: A Match Made in Heaven

Today, the United States ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, presented his credentials to the United Nations.

Can 2007 come any faster?

Recess is a time for fun...right?

Wow! Here we are drawing the month of July to a close. I'm sad to say there weren't any really major storms in the realm of meteorology in my area; however, there are always plenty of storms on the political front!

As we move into the last full month of summer, the Congress is in recess for its summer holiday, and when it returns after Labor Day, it will find John Bolton as the United States ambassador to the United Nations. That will be a pretty sweet deal for Mr. Bolton. He will get to serve at the president's leisure until the 109th Congress is inaugurated in January, 2007; so he has over a year to make nations that already hate us hate us even more. It truly is sweet!

Yet this is just another example of how George Bush sees himself. He doesn't understand the "true" politics of being a consensus maker. He doesn't understand that a true politician finds the road of moderation and strides along it playing both sides of the fence, which in the end wins him accolades of adoration.

Mr. President, in the end, you will have served two terms as president of the United States, but you will forever be known as the president who gave us the Iraq war. History will not list you among the great American presidents, who created positive institutions that saved a generation from turmoil and hardship. Saddam Hussein, and his Iraq, will be your footnote when future histories are written. Thousands of American families will remember you as the butcher who sent their children to the slaughter. Thanks to your inept leadership thousands of Iraqi families will know Americans as the killers of grandmothers, grandfathers, mothers, fathers, sons and daughters. Your brand of democracy came at a price that in the end will prove to be too much to pay for Iraq. True democracy is won from within. Our own history is the best story. The government that was forced upon us is the one we rejected. In the end, we, as Americans, chose our own best destiny and course for change and prosperity.

Every nation, including Iraq, deserves nothing less. During our recess, let's not forget that the tears of American families will be shed for those who have been asked to die on foreign soil, innocent Iraqi families will be devastated and forever altered, and in the end it us, the average American, who must pay the final price with our dignity and soul.

Frist on crack

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is supporting funds for stem cell research! All in the face of King George, his arrogant party leader; not to mention the party's extremely religious fanatic right.

I think I'm gonna faint!

More games!

I just love how this Senate confirmation hearing is coming together, even before the "actual" confirmation is under way.

Like every intelligent person has observed, George Bush seems more and more arrogant. He expects the Senate to confirm his nominee without asking any of the tough and important questions!

Roberts' record shows that he is nowhere near the center of politics and the law. He has a suspect conservative record, considering just the fact that he worked for Ronnie Reagan and Daddy Bush. His record as an attorney seems to have been spent working to reverse many of the reforms which characterized the fifties and sixties.

Especially, now in today's world, we have to strive for moderation in government and the judicial system. Every point on the political spectrum must be represented to accurately portray America. But we can count on Bush to give us a nominee who is almost a fascist!

Let's get real!

My old friend

Hennessy, it's that good! I'm thinking about becoming Jackson Hennessy.

Glorious day!

What's the definition of a patriot?

Yesterday, I was watching Book TV on C-SPAN 2 (shut up!) and there was this guy who wrote a book about terrorism during World War II (you know, the BIG one). Anyhow, he likened the actions of today with those of FDR. Now we all know that Georgie is no FDR! Really! But I stipulate to the historical record and it does show that during this time of international crisis, the president did do things that were questionable, such as imprisoning Japanese-Americans, and in some ways these things are similar to what King George is doing today.

Now to the thesis of my post: what is a patriot?

In our time, the Congress of the United States is unwilling (for obvious reasons, such as political party) to stand up and question the policies of the White House. It understandable, but it is more of a travesty. Here's why. We elect representatives to represent us. They take an oath to defend and stay true to the Constitution, not the president or their political party. We would live in a different country if our directly elected representatives stood on principle and the letter of the law. If they chose to have the spine to say, "Enough is enough!" If they had the courage to call the president to task and say in a clear voice that the Congress of the United States is not for sale! To say, "Mr. President, the Congress represents the interests of those who elected us." No, a patriot is not one who stands idly by and thinks that by speaking out against what he or she believes is wrong makes him or her a bad American. It is quite the opposite; it is a person who stands up and questions the path we are asked to follow! It is the voice reminding us all of the truth of the matter and its dire consequences. We always seem to forget that we are a nation founded by great patriots who stood up and questioned their leaders.

Let's remember these simple facts when we are asked to give up our basic civil liberties for cloak-and-dagger policies, when we are asked to spy on our neighbors and look at others with suspicion, or asked to die for unclear reasons in far off battlefields.

It's the American way to question and demand accountability!

Another Blank Check for George?

Either put up or shut up! It seems Georgie wants a covert confirmation in the United States Senate. I suppose that it's a good thing that I am not a senator, or else I'd be the most hated in the chamber! I don't play ball. I just get the job done! It's either up or down, not all around.

Stop! Don't shoot! (Batente! Não dispare!)

What's up with that Brazilian guy that got mowed down Friday in London? I mean when the cops say "stop" and you jump the turnstyles and run on anyway, what do you expect to happen? The cops are going to stop chasing you and let you go? Puh-lease!

How sad!

I can't wait to hear the rest of the story! (Not that I'm trying to sound like Paul Harvey, by the way.)

Funny Things

Today, I got a mass-email from Senator Libby Dole asking me to support a speedy confirmation process for John Roberts in the Senate, who she says is already under attack from liberal special interests groups. My first instinct was, "How the hell did I get this email from Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee?" Nextly, the RSCC mustn't know I am my very own, individual liberal special interest group! HA!

I believe ANY nominee for a life-long position (especially as a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States) must expect, and demand, to be asked tough questions and answer them honestly and forthright. Every American deserves to know the position of the nominee on the issues that impact them today and potential questions arising in the future, especially those relating to important individual civil liberties, such as homosexual rights and the continued rising tide of terrorism.

So, in response to Senator Dole's request, I will encourage my ultra-conservative Republican senators to ask the tough questions and demand appropriate and telling responses from the nominee; it's only fair!

I love it!

Roberts, or the Ayotollah?

According to what I know, Georgie should have just nominated the Ayotollah to the Supreme Court!

What a disgrace! The road WILL get bumpy from here on out now!

Georgie's Big Announcement

Who the hell is Edith Clement? CNN seems to think she's the nominee. I looked up her up and basically the secretive lives of federal judges limited my understanding of her to being a judge on the Fifth Circuit of Appeals (down in Louisiana), and she's probably a hardline conservative (look at who's doing the nominating).

Ugh! Who knows? We've got until 9pm before we're told for sure.

No Hypothetical Questions

On Wednesday, Senator Bill Frist stated that the confirmation process of the president's candidate for the Supreme Court should focus on the nominee's past and not the future. I think that is a bit biased.

Sure, the Senate must consider the nominee's past, current, AND future actions. The future entails a great deal of conjecture and hypothetical situations, I understand. A potential justice must be open and honest regarding their philosophy regarding the Constitution and how it impacts the lives of Americans in all realms of society.

It is naive and arrogant to assert who should be a justice based simply on their education, experience, and Bush political affiliated tendencies. That is a rather Republican ideology.

Senator Frist is a curious man to suggest it!

Okay, even more...

After reviewing the Constitution further, the executive has the power to appoint individuals during a recess of the Senate (Article 2, §2, ¶3), but he must obey the "consent and advice" clause (Article 2, §2, ¶2) of the Constitution regarding appointments, during the time the Senate is in session.

I would venture to say that in this event the retiring member would have to continue his or her duties on the bench.

More Thoughts...

I just refreshed my memory on Article III of the Constitution and it doesn't mention anything about a vacancy that is not filled.

I need to check and see if there are any precedents for a vacancy on the Supreme Court that is not filled by the beginning of the new term.

Interesting...

A Spot of Curiosity

What would happen if the Supreme Court comes back into session in October without a newly appointed justice? I wonder if Justice O'Connor would be obligated to serve another term, considering her resignation is contingent on the confirmation of her replacement to the bench.

Karl Rove

"The best laid plans of mice and men..." (or something like that), but I'm not sure that it was a very well laid plan for Mr. Rove (is he a mouse or a man?).

I have to say I loved the parody of Karl Rove, as hellish soul, in American Dad when he ran the campaign for title character Stan Smith's (who is a CIA agent, no less) election for church deacon.

Stay tuned...I think King George is about to do some flip-flopping on an issue here!

When will it be?

When is George Bush going to give us his nominee for the Supreme Court? We're coming up on two weeks since Justice O'Connor submitted her resignation. We will have to spend time fighting over his nomination, I'm sure!

October is not that far off....

Rules of Warfare

It might be economical to consider the following fact of war: people die.

Interestingly, I have given this simple fact a lot of thought over the course of yesterday and today. A war is inevitably two forces siding agaisnt each other for domination and control of land, sea, air, political considerations, or religious dogma. The British and Americans have sided against a single foe (albeit, two--Iraq and terrorism; hereinafter, I will focus on terrorism).

Yesterday, there were casualties in the war on terrorism. Even though this war is abstract, it is imperative to understand that when you fire at the enemy, the enemy might happen to fire back. Yes, when they fire it is more than likely it will be on your own soil, but sometimes wars come to our own doorsteps. The enemy seeps in during the night following the shadows. Simply, we must be prepared to reap what we sow. In this case, we must expect to be targeted and attacked; to think otherwise is highly arrogant and a bit naive!

Happy day!

Bagdad v. London

I was just wondering how the deaths in London compare to the daily deaths of Iraqis and Americans in Iraq? Basically, there are bombings daily in the country of Iraq that kill its citizens. These attacks are the product of terrorism, but they get no more than 2 minutes of mention on the evening news.

So my question is are the lives of Londoners more important than those of Iraqis? The answer is simple, no they're not, but the deaths that occur in Iraq do not support the success of the American military occupation of that country. Additionally, the deaths of the British continue to support Bush's scare tactics of the need for continued support of his foreign policies.

Ugh!

Bush Toppled in the United Kingdom

I woke up this morning to the news coming out of London. I hadn't even given thought to the possibility of an attack taking place during the G8 summit, but it makes perfect sense.

As we know, Great Britian is George Bush's lap dog in Iraq. There has been strong opposition to Blair's support of Washington. I believe, like in Madrid, this may put the final nails into Bush's metaphorical coffin, regarding his London support.

And we were all led to believe that since the fall of Iraq's Saddam Hussein, we could rest easy knowing we had destroyed international terrorism. Wasn't that they reason for invading Iraq????? Or was it???

Hmmmm......

Jackson Leslie, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States

Finally! My career change is here. Jackson Leslie for the recently vacated position of Associate Justice!

Why? Why not?

I'm up for the move to the Washington, D.C.-area. I am all about lifetime appointments, too! I get a kick ass leather chair, a fancy smancy black robe, and four law school grads to do my work for me! What's not to love?

Every American should submit his or her resume to the King George for this job! The Constitution sets up no prerequisites for the position other than being nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Who says you have to be a lawyer first? BAH!

Independence Day

Two hundred twenty-nine years ago today, a few rebels stood defiant, in word and deed, against their colonial parent. Although, King George III recorded in his personal diary "nothing of significance happened today," he found out shortly that, indeed, something of significance did happen within his vast land empire.

So many, many years later will we, as the grandchildren of the Revolution, stand against another King George, a tyrant, bent on imperialism?

Hmmm...???

SCOTUS Nominee

More on this Supreme Court who-ha that is coming before long...

King George really doesn't have a choice but to nominate a woman to fill Justice O'Connor's vacancy. Albeit, this will be a messy confirmation hearing in the Senate, considering all of the federal appellate court confirmations in recent months.

Even so, we must remember that an independent judiciary depends on an independence among all branches of the government! The executive branch will fulfill it's constitutional duty by nominating a candidate, and then the Senate must be left free to confirm that executive nomination. Unfortunately, when I see the Senate Majority Leader, Senator Frist, all I see is King George's puppet dancing on the puppeteer's strings. Since when does the legislative branch have to follow the agenda of the executive branch?

Only time will tell...

O'Connor

And they're off...

Hillary: My Hero

I was flipping through the channels last night and I stopped at Fox News (weird or me), but only because they were talking about a new book that allegedly gives all the "dirt" on the real Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The book, The Truth About Hillary : What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She'll Go to Become President, based on what this conservative media outlet said, is nothing more than conjecture and lies based on innuendo and jealousy.

All of these conservative groups make a federal case out of the fact Hillary may run for president in 2008. Is it so bad if she does? I actually wanted to her to run in 2004, but being the politician she is, she knew it's best not to go against an incumbent. I know that if Hillary does run in 2008, I will be there to support her candidacy and election with everything in me. I believe in the Clinton years, and the legacy left by Bill Clinton, but subsequently squandered and grossly mismanaged by a Bush White House.

Hillary 2008

Gotta Love Those British!

More bad news for King George about his terrible rumpus into Iraq, made possible by British government sources! Yay! This British release supports the information found in the infamous Downing Street Memo, which I discuss in my previous post.

The Eyes Only Briefing supports the facts, or lack thereof, the Bush camp used to justify a military incursion into Iraq at the peril of 1,700+ American soldiers' lives and about $200,000,000,000 of MY money! I definitely want a refund!

I have underlined some very interesting points made by the brief! Enjoy!

The text of the The Eyes Only Briefing (as provided by Democracy for America):

PERSONAL SECRET UK EYES ONLY

IRAQ: CONDITIONS FOR MILITARY ACTION

(A Note by Officials)

Summary

Ministers are invited to:

(1) Note the latest position on US military planning and timescales for possible action.

(2) Agree that the objective of any military action should be a stable and law-abiding Iraq, within present borders, co-operating with the international community, no longer posing a threat to its neighbours or international security, and abiding by its international obligations on WMD.

(3) Agree to engage the US on the need to set military plans within a realistic political strategy, which includes identifying the succession to Saddam Hussein and creating the conditions necessary to justify government military action, which might include an ultimatum for the return of UN weapons inspectors to Iraq. This should include a call from the Prime Minister to President Bush ahead of the briefing of US military plans to the President on 4 August.

(4) Note the potentially long lead times involved in equipping UK Armed Forces to undertake operations in the Iraqi theatre and agree that the MOD should bring forward proposals for the procurement of Urgent Operational Requirements under cover of the lessons learned from Afghanistan and the outcome of SR2002.

(5) Agree to the establishment of an ad hoc group of officials under Cabinet Office Chairmanship to consider the development of an information campaign to be agreed with the US.

Introduction

1. The US Government's military planning for action against Iraq is proceeding apace. But, as yet, it lacks a political framework. In particular, little thought has been given to creating the political conditions for military action, or the aftermath and how to shape it.

2. When the Prime Minister discussed Iraq with President Bush at Crawford in April he said that the UK would support military action to bring about regime change, provided that certain conditions were met: efforts had been made to construct a coalition/shape public opinion, the Israel-Palestine Crisis was quiescent, and the options for action to eliminate Iraq's WMD through the UN weapons inspectors had been exhausted.

3. We need now to reinforce this message and to encourage the US Government to place its military planning within a political framework, partly to forestall the risk that military action is precipitated in an unplanned way by, for example, an incident in the No Fly Zones. This is particularly important for the UK because it is necessary to create the conditions in which we could legally support military action. Otherwise we face the real danger that the US will commit themselves to a course of action which we would find very difficult to support.

4. In order to fulfil the conditions set out by the Prime Minister for UK support for military action against Iraq, certain preparations need to be made, and other considerations taken into account. This note sets them out in a form which can be adapted for use with the US Government. Depending on US intentions, a decision in principle may be needed soon on whether and in what form the UK takes part in military action.

The Goal

5. Our objective should be a stable and law-abiding Iraq, within present borders, co-operating with the international community, no longer posing a threat to its neighbours or to international security, and abiding by its international obligations on WMD. It seems unlikely that this could be achieved while the current Iraqi regime remains in power. US military planning unambiguously takes as its objective the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime, followed by elimination if Iraqi WMD. It is however, by no means certain, in the view of UK officials, that one would necessarily follow from the other. Even if regime change is a necessary condition for controlling Iraqi WMD, it is certainly not a sufficient one.

US Military Planning

6. Although no political decisions have been taken, US military planners have drafted options for the US Government to undertake an invasion of Iraq. In a 'Running Start', military action could begin as early as November of this year, with no overt military build-up. Air strikes and support for opposition groups in Iraq would lead initially to small-scale land operations, with further land forces deploying sequentially, ultimately overwhelming Iraqi forces and leading to the collapse of the Iraqi regime. A 'Generated Start' would involve a longer build-up before any military action were taken, as early as January 2003. US military plans include no specifics on the strategic context either before or after the campaign. Currently the preference appears to be for the 'Running Start'. CDS will be ready to brief Ministers in more detail.

7. US plans assume, as a minimum, the use of British bases in Cyprus and Diego Garcia. This means that legal base issues would arise virtually whatever option Ministers choose with regard to UK participation.

The Viability of the Plans

8. The Chiefs of Staff have discussed the viability of US military plans. Their initial view is that there are a number of questions which would have to be answered before they could assess whether the plans are sound. Notably these include the realism of the 'Running Start', the extent to which the plans are proof against Iraqi counter-attack using chemical or biological weapons and the robustness of US assumptions about the bases and about Iraqi (un)willingness to fight.

UK Military Contribution

9. The UK's ability to contribute forces depends on the details of the US military planning and the time available to prepare and deploy them. The MOD is examining how the UK might contribute to US-led action. The options range from deployment of a Division (ie Gulf War sized contribution plus naval and air forces) to making available bases. It is already clear that the UK could not generate a Division in time for an operation in January 2003, unless publicly visible decisions were taken very soon. Maritime and air forces could be deployed in time, provided adequate basing arrangements could be made. The lead times involved in preparing for UK military involvement include the procurement of Urgent Operational Requirements, for which there is no financial provision.

The Conditions Necessary for Military Action

10. Aside from the existence of a viable military plan we consider the following conditions necessary for military action and UK participation: justification/legal base; an international coalition; a quiescent Israel/Palestine; a positive risk/benefit assessment; and the preparation of domestic opinion.

Justification

11. US views of international law vary from that of the UK and the international community. Regime change per se is not a proper basis for military action under international law. But regime change could result from action that is otherwise lawful. We would regard the use of force against Iraq, or any other state, as lawful if exercised in the right of individual or collective self-defence, if carried out to avert an overwhelming humanitarian catastrophe, or authorised by the UN Security Council. A detailed consideration of the legal issues, prepared earlier this year, is at Annex A. The legal position would depend on the precise circumstances at the time. Legal bases for an invasion of Iraq are in principle conceivable in both the first two instances but would be difficult to establish because of, for example, the tests of immediacy and proportionality. Further legal advice would be needed on this point.

12. This leaves the route under the UNSC resolutions on weapons inspectors. Kofi Annan has held three rounds of meetings with Iraq in an attempt to persuade them to admit the UN weapons inspectors. These have made no substantive progress; the Iraqis are deliberately obfuscating. Annan has downgraded the dialogue but more pointless talks are possible. We need to persuade the UN and the international community that this situation cannot be allowed to continue ad infinitum. We need to set a deadline, leading to an ultimatum. It would be preferable to obtain backing of a UNSCR for any ultimatum and early work would be necessary to explore with Kofi Annan and the Russians, in particular, the scope for achieving this.

13. In practice, facing pressure of military action, Saddam is likely to admit weapons inspectors as a means of forestalling it. But once admitted, he would not allow them to operate freely. UNMOVIC (the successor to UNSCOM) will take at least six months after entering Iraq to establish the monitoring and verification system under Resolution 1284 necessary to assess whether Iraq is meeting its obligations. Hence, even if UN inspectors gained access today, by January 2003 they would at best only just be completing setting up. It is possible that they will encounter Iraqi obstruction during this period, but this more likely when they are fully operational.

14. It is just possible that an ultimatum could be cast in terms which Saddam would reject (because he is unwilling to accept unfettered access) and which would not be regarded as unreasonable by the international community. However, failing that (or an Iraqi attack) we would be most unlikely to achieve a legal base for military action by January 2003.

An International Coalition

15. An international coalition is necessary to provide a military platform and desirable for political purposes.

16. US military planning assumes that the US would be allowed to use bases in Kuwait (air and ground forces), Jordan, in the Gulf (air and naval forces) and UK territory (Diego Garcia and our bases in Cyprus). The plans assume that Saudi Arabia would withhold co-operation except granting military over-flights. On the assumption that military action would involve operations in the Kurdish area in the North of Iraq, the use of bases in Turkey would also be necessary.

17. In the absence of UN authorisation, there will be problems in securing the support of NATO and EU partners. Australia would be likely to participate on the same basis as the UK. France might be prepared to take part if she saw military action as inevitable. Russia and China, seeking to improve their US relations, might set aside their misgivings if sufficient attention were paid to their legal and economic concerns. Probably the best we could expect from the region would be neutrality. The US is likely to restrain Israel from taking part in military action. In practice, much of the international community would find it difficult to stand in the way of the determined course of the US hegemon. However, the greater the international support, the greater the prospects of success.

A Quiescent Israel-Palestine

18. The Israeli re-occupation of the West Bank has dampened Palestinian violence for the time being but is unsustainable in the long-term and stoking more trouble for the future. The Bush speech was at best a half step forward. We are using the Palestinian reform agenda to make progress, including a resumption of political negotiations. The Americans are talking of a ministerial conference in November or later. Real progress towards a viable Palestinian state is the best way to undercut Palestinian extremists and reduce Arab antipathy to military action against Saddam Hussein. However, another upsurge of Palestinian/Israeli violence is highly likely. The co-incidence of such an upsurge with the preparations for military action against Iraq cannot be ruled out. Indeed Saddam would use continuing violence in the Occupied Territories to bolster popular Arab support for his regime.

Benefits/Risks

19. Even with a legal base and a viable military plan, we would still need to ensure that the benefits of action outweigh the risks. In particular, we need to be sure that the outcome of the military action would match our objective as set out in paragraph 5 above. A post-war occupation of Iraq could lead to a protracted and costly nation-building exercise. As already made clear, the US military plans are virtually silent on this point. Washington could look to us to share a disproportionate share of the burden. Further work is required to define more precisely the means by which the desired endstate would be created, in particular what form of Government might replace Saddam Hussein's regime and the timescale within which it would be possible to identify a successor. We must also consider in greater detail the impact of military action on other UK interests in the region.

Domestic Opinion

20. Time will be required to prepare public opinion in the UK that it is necessary to take military action against Saddam Hussein. There would also need to be a substantial effort to secure the support of Parliament. An information campaign will be needed which has to be closely related to an overseas information campaign designed to influence Saddam Hussein, the Islamic World and the wider international community. This will need to give full coverage to the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, including his WMD, and the legal justification for action.

Timescales

21. Although the US military could act against Iraq as soon as November, we judge that a military campaign is unlikely to start until January 2003, if only because of the time it will take to reach consensus in Washington. That said, we judge that for climactic reasons, military action would need to start by January 2003, unless action were deferred until the following autumn.

22. As this paper makes clear, even this timescale would present problems. This means that: (a) We need to influence US consideration of the military plans before President Bush is briefed on 4 August, through contacts betweens the Prime Minister and the President and at other levels