Do not read Bushites cult members

[eg420ne]

The Rant
Time to impeach a President
By DOUG THOMPSON
Jan 2, 2006, 08:26



Iâ??ve always felt impeachment is the nuclear option of politics; a drastic action we call in after all else fails. Thatâ??s why Iâ??ve been reluctant to call for the impeachment of President George W. Bush.

No longer. The reckless, arrogant actions of the man leave me with no choice but to consider that final solution.

Time to impeach the son of a bitch.

I donâ??t come to this conclusion lightly. Impeachment is a divisive process that all too often tears the country apart. Only two Presidents have actually been brought to trial before Congress under the impeachment process: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Both were impeached more for political dislike than actual crimes against the Constitution.

Richard Nixon resigned from office after the joint Congressional committee investigating Watergate voted to recommend impeachment and avoided, in all likelihood, becoming the first President to be both impeached and convicted. Resignation was a rare, honorable moment in Nixonâ??s tattered political career.

But we cannot expect such honor from George W. Bush. Honor is not part of his modus operandi, as absent as honesty in a career marked by lies, corruption and abuse of the public trust.

Bushâ??s arrogance by continuing his illegal spying on Americans by the federal government is just his latest high crime against the Constitution, a document which he blithely dismisses as â??just a goddamned piece of paper.â?�

At the very least, Bush is a reckless, irresponsible leader, one who led this nation to invade another country in a war based on fabricated reasons, a man who has sent more than 2,000 Americans and countless Iraqi civilians to their deaths while hiding behind a rationale based on a lie.

At worst, he is a war criminal, a power-crazed despot who could go down in history as a mass murderer. History will determine the final legacy of George W. Bush and I doubt seriously that history will be kind to a political figure of his ilk.

Iâ??m not here to deal with the possibilities of the future but instead with the realities of now and that requires swift, decisive action against a dictatorial madman who threatens all of our futures.

Six months ago, when the Downing Street Memo surfaced, I said Bush should be impeached if it was true. I later backed off. I was wrong. He needs to go. Iâ??m not sure America can survive three more years with Bush driving the ship of state.

Iâ??m not sure we can survive three more years of corrupt control of Congress by a party that circles the wagons to protect criminals like Tom DeLay and then drops its collective trousers, grabs its ankles and allows itself to be gleefully screwed by fatcat lobbyists and cash-rich special interest groups.

Iâ??m not sure we can wait for the electorate to take action because the electorate has been pretty damn dumb and stupid for too long and given us too many miscreants living in the White House and wandering the halls of Congress.

Letâ??s start the New Year by impeaching the criminal at the top of this corrupt pyramid scheme and then work our way down through the sordid pile. Indict Vice President Dick Cheney for bribes he paid and the money he laundered while Chairman of Halliburton. Send Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to prison for insider trading. Put former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay under the jail.

Time to send a message to the cabal of greed and corruption that has taken over our government and tell them that their ass is grass and weâ??ve got a bunch of lawn mowers fully gassed and ready to start cutting

eg420ne Reviewed by eg420ne on 01-02-2006. Do not read Bushites cult members The Rant Time to impeach a President By DOUG THOMPSON Jan 2, 2006, 08:26 Iâ??ve always felt impeachment is the nuclear option of politics; a drastic action we call in after all else fails. Thatâ??s why Iâ??ve been reluctant to call for the impeachment of President George W. Bush. No longer. The reckless, arrogant actions of the man leave me with no choice but to consider that final solution. Rating: 5

[eg420ne]

What Did They Say When Clinton Was Being Impeached?

Tom Delay (R-TX):
"This nation sits at a crossroads. One direction points to the higher road of the rule of law. Sometimes hard, sometimes unpleasant, this path relies on truth, justice and the rigorous application of the principle that no man is above the law. Now, the other road is the path of least resistance. This is where we start making exceptions to our laws based on poll numbers and spin control. This is when we pitch the law completely overboard when the mood fits us, when we ignore the facts in order to cover up the truth.

No man is above the law, and no man is below the law. Thatâ??s the principle that we all hold very dear in this country."


Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.):
"I suggest impeachment is like beauty: apparently in the eye of the beholder. But I hold a different view. And it's not a vengeful one, it's not vindictive, and it's not craven. It's just a concern for the Constitution and a high respect for the rule of law. ... as a lawyer and a legislator for most of my very long life, I have a particular reverence for our legal system. It protects the innocent, it punishes the guilty, it defends the powerless, it guards freedom, it summons the noblest instincts of the human spirit.

The rule of law protects you and it protects me from the midnight fire on our roof or the 3 a.m. knock on our door."


James Sensenbrenner: (R-WI):
"What is on trial here is the truth and the rule of law. Our failure to bring President Clinton to account for his lying under oath and preventing the courts from administering equal justice under law, will cause a cancer to be present in our society for generations. I want those parents who ask me the questions, to be able to tell their children that even if you are president of the United States, if you lie when sworn "to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth," you will face the consequences of that action, even when you don't accept the responsibility for them."


Chuck Hagel (R-NB):
"There can be no shading of right and wrong. The complicated currents that have coursed through this impeachment process are many. But after stripping away the underbrush of legal technicalities and nuance, I find that the President abused his sacred power by lying and obstructing justice. How can parents instill values and morality in their children? How can educators teach our children? How can the rule of law for every American be applied equally if we have two standards of justice in America--one for the powerful and the other for the rest of us?"


Bill Frist (R-TN):
"I will have no part in the creation of a constitutional double-standard to benefit the President. He is not above the law. If an ordinary citizen committed these crimes, he would go to jail."


Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas):
"When someone is elected president, they receive the greatest gift possible from the American people, their trust. To violate that trust is to raise questions about fitness for office. My constituents often remind me that if anyone else in a position of authority -- for example, a business executive, a military officer of a professional educator -- had acted as the evidence indicates the president did, their career would be over. The rules under which President Nixon would have been tried for impeachment had he not resigned contain this statement: "The office of the president is such that it calls for a higher level of conduct than the average citizen in the United States."

[eg420ne]

LIAR, LIAR, economy on FIRE

Article after article declares that inflation has been kept in check between 2-3% annually. Shit, they even characterized Greenspan as an inflation-slayer!

But here I am, paying almost twice as much for a gallon of milk this year as I did last year, not to mention all other food groups. And of course, I'm paying a large chunk of my income (debt) for the damn gasoline I put in my car, not to mention subway fares, despite the claims that energy prices have relaxed. What gives?!!

No doubt, the mainstream media often LIES. I could go over examples ad nauseum. But more often than not, they merely massage the truth. Apparently, this is why those SOBs have been singing songs of victory over inflation:

Recent inflation data shows wholesale prices, excluding food and energy costs, have risen at a mere 2.6 percent for the last 12 months, while core consumer prices, which also exclude such volatile components, rose only 2.1 percent over the same period.
What on earth is left of "core consumer prices" after you've "excluded food and energy costs?!!" This sounds more like an inflation index for investors not consumers!

All this says is that within the group of products where consumer demand is elastic, prices are fairly stable. You're damn right they are! Consumers would stop buying in a heartbeat if they weren't! But, for goods that consumers have no choice but to buy, consumers are being screwed, royally!

In all fairness, I have to give credit to the author of this particular AP report, first for revealing the massaging technique her cohorts use to mask the truth. But also, for mentioning that bloggers like Jeff Matthews, who insists that his haircuts have gone from $17 to $22, are exposing the lies as they're told.

Caught again, lousy liars! If you're going to lie about something, pick a subject that's not as obvious as this. After all, we are the consumers!

http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspo...y-on-fire.html

[eg420ne]

Generals gathered in their masses
Just like witches at black masses
Evil minds that plot destruction
Sorcerers of death's construction
In the fields the bodies burning
As the war machine keeps turning
Death and hatred to mankind
poisoning their brainwashed minds
Oh Lord yeah

Politicians hide themselves away
They only started the war
Why should they go out to fight
They leave that all to the poor

Time will tell on their power minds
Making war just for fun
Treating people just like pawns in chess
Wait 'till their judgment day comes

Now in darkness world stops turning
As the war machine keeps burning
No more war pigs have the power
Hand of God has struck the hour
Day of judgment God is calling
On their knees, the war pigs crawling
Begging mercy for their sins
Satan laughing spreads his wings
Oh Lord yeah

[eg420ne]

A Gestapo Administration

By Paul Craig Roberts
1-2-6

Caught in gratuitous and illegal spying on American citizens, the Bush administration has defended its illegal activity and set the Justice (sic) Department on the trail of the person or persons who informed the New York Times of Bush's violation of law. Note the astounding paradox: The Bush administration is caught red-handed in blatant illegality and responds by trying to arrest the patriot who exposed the administration's illegal behavior.

Bush has actually declared it treasonous to reveal his illegal behavior! His propagandists, who masquerade as news organizations, have taken up the line: To reveal wrong-doing by the Bush administration is to give aid and comfort to the enemy.

Compared to Spygate, Watergate was a kindergarten picnic. The Bush administration's lies, felonies, and illegalities have revealed it to be a criminal administration with a police state mentality and police state methods. Now Bush and his attorney general have gone the final step and declared Bush to be above the law. Bush aggressively mimics Hitler's claim that defense of the realm entitles him to ignore the rule of law.

Bush's acts of illegal domestic spying are gratuitous because there are no valid reasons for Bush to illegally spy. The Foreign Intelligence Services Act gives Bush all the power he needs to spy on terrorist suspects. All the administration is required to do is to apply to a secret FISA court for warrants. The Act permits the administration to spy first and then apply for a warrant, should time be of the essence.

The problem is that Bush has totally ignored the law and the court. Why would President Bush ignore the law and the FISA court? It is certainly not because the court in its three decades of existence was uncooperative. According to attorney Martin Garbus (New York Observer, 12/28/05), the secret court has issued more warrants than all federal district judges combined, only once denying a warrant.

Why, then, has the administration created another scandal for itself on top of the WMD, torture, hurricane, and illegal detention scandals?

There are two possible reasons.

One reason is that the Bush administration is being used to concentrate power in the executive. The old conservative movement, which honors the separation of powers, has been swept away. Its place has been taken by a neoconservative movement that worships executive power.

The other reason is that the Bush administration could not go to the FISA secret court for warrants because it was not spying for legitimate reasons and, therefore, had to keep the court in the dark about its activities.

What might these illegitimate reasons be? Could it be that the Bush administration used the spy apparatus of the US government in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election?

Could we attribute the feebleness of the Democrats as an opposition party to information obtained through illegal spying that would subject them to blackmail?

These possible reasons for bypassing the law and the court need to be fully investigated and debated. No administration in my lifetime has given so many strong reasons to oppose and condemn it as has the Bush administration. Nixon was driven from office because of a minor burglary of no consequence in itself. Clinton was impeached because he did not want the embarrassment of publicly acknowledging that he engaged in adulterous sex acts in the Oval Office. In contrast, Bush has deceived the public and Congress in order to invade Iraq, illegally detained Americans, illegally tortured detainees, and illegally spied on Americans. Bush has upheld neither the Constitution nor the law of the land. A majority of Americans disapprove of what Bush has done; yet, the Democratic Party remains a muted spectator.

Why is the Justice (sic) Department investigating the leak of Bush's illegal activity instead of the illegal activity committed by Bush? Is the purpose to stonewall Congress' investigation of Bush's illegal spying? By announcing a Justice (sic) Department investigation, the Bush administration positions itself to decline to respond to Congress on the grounds that it would compromise its own investigation into national security matters.

What will the federal courts do? When Hitler challenged the German judicial system, it collapsed and accepted that Hitler was the law. Hitler's claims were based on nothing but his claims, just as the claim for extra-legal power for Bush is based on nothing but memos written by his political appointees.

The Bush administration, backed by the neoconservative Federalist Society, has brought the separation of powers, the foundation of our political system, to crisis. The Federalist Society, an organization of Republican lawyers, favors more "energy in the executive." Distrustful of Congress and the American people, the Federalist Society never fails to support rulings that concentrate power in the executive branch of government. It is a paradox that conservative foundations and individuals have poured money for 23 years into an organization that is inimical to the separation of powers, the foundation of our constitutional system.

September 11, 2001, played into neoconservative hands exactly as the 1933 Reichstag fire played into Hitler's hands. Fear, hysteria, and national emergency are proven tools of political power grabs. Now that the federal courts are beginning to show some resistance to Bush's claims of power, will another terrorist attack allow the Bush administration to complete its coup?

_____

Dr. Roberts is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.

Copyright © 2006 Creators Syndicate