Truman!!!! Where can we find another one? But the big question if we did find another Truman, would the "powers" allow such a man to be President?

your sure right about this, and there will be no easy answers if we can overcome this, it will definitely take pulling a rabbit out of a hat right before your very eyes. there is one thing for certain though , the status quo is unacceptable

Let's face it: ONLY EGOMANIACS GET TO BE POTUS. If we all learn to ASSUME that our President is an a-hole, we could learn effective damage control. Give me divided government any day.

The political class has always been like this. Their sole aim in lifeis to get power and maintain it. Of course the entire debate is academic. 2004 will be remembered as the last Presidential Election in America. As Doug has written, Bush has signed Executive Orders that allow him to seize Control of the U.S. Government. Expect it to be implemented on January 21, 2008.

Is it me? Or am I the only ONE in this vountry, save a few! That see Politicians saying one thing about a certain goings on in government that they either support or donot support in a speech they give to TV and papers. And then a few days later or a month later. They have a totally different aspect on the issue they claimed was MUCh needed before? Talk about spinning the turd? Politicians these days will lie right to your face and say they are for America. Liars. All of them. I have even Caught ron Paul in lies. Can you believe Ron Paul. The Guy who is always writing pieces on Unconstitutional Government Doings, VOTED for the Patriot Idiots act extension? UN F'ing BELIEVABLE!

Many refer to Bush as incompetent. Nothing could be further from the truth. Every decision and move he makes is carefully orchestrated to further the neo-conservative agenda. To accuse him of incompetence implies that he might be forgiven for his actions.

Truman wasn't "allowed" to be president the first time. Roosevelt did not plan to die in office, and did not trust Truman enough to let him know about the Manhatten project.

Truman was part of the political machine and considered a "safe" VP for FDR.

He surprised everyone by winning re-election. But he would have lost in 1952 to Ike by a landslide, so even he was not that safe.

When "W" was selected, Gore Vidal predicted that Bush would be the "most hated president" in US History. At the time I just dismissed this as a stray comment from a New York Liberal. Apparently Vidal knew something ab out the man I missed.

i think i've got a solution to the problem! since cheney has such a penchant for shooting caged and crippled birds, why not hand him a 12 guage on the south lawn - after giving gwb a head start. dick should have no problem finishing off that lame duck!!

Truman wasn't a white knight, either. The two atomic bombs aside, Truman pulled 'Operation Fish Hook', which saw huge numbers of soldiers and POWs originally from former USSR held territories sent back through trickery and force to be slaughtered and imprisoned by Stalin.

Doug,
I'm 54 years old and have been a registered Democrat since 1972.Thirty four years of never missing an election;I have been a "lesser of two evils voter",more times than I care to remember.I may have to hold my nose while casting my vote but I always manage to add one more ballot to the Democratic side.
Thirty four years;WOW!!!That's the longest continuous relationship of my life.I've been married twice;both times for eleven years.Both marriages combined fall very short of my time as a Democrat.
I take politics very seriously.Many Americans take voting for granted and and can always come up with a glib excuse to justify their lack of civic participation.Even worse are those brilliant folks out there that cast their ballots without really knowing the truth beyond the soundbite.It takes a little effort but the information is out there ready to help us vote with at least little knowledge about those that hope to lead us.
Over the course of the past eight or ten years,I have been concerned about my party's lack of agression,lack of enthusiasm,and lack of leadership.But most of all,a lack of a coherent,unified platform,that stands up for the hard working average,middle class citizenry that makes up most of this country.
I have been thinking about a separation for some time.When Dr.Dean took over the reigns of the DNC,I saw reason to hope and decided that I could give it one last chance.I beleived that given time,and the full combined energy and joyful participation of the party big shots,maybe,just maybe,we could be an opposition party again.I felt that the last two months of 2005,and January and February of 06 really began showing Mr.Bush in a more truthful glare of bright media lighting than any of his previous years in office.Poll numbers down,Iraq going badly,VP shooting lawyers without a permit,and the ports debacle.Now is when National Democratic leaders should come out swinging.But instead,the party's voices are aimed at each other as much as the opposition.
Bush is a fool.How he has been propped up this long is beyound me.If you look in the dictionary for the word,"incompetent"it says GW Bush.Iraq is a trainwreak,we need to bring our troops home NOW!!!If we stay another fifty years,the only real difference will be many thousand more dead American Troops.GW's prescription plan is a total bust.The Gulf Coast is there to see every day,a fine symbol of the lies and detachment of this administration.And the Dubai mess hurt Bush a little,but he's not up for re-election.I believe the Republicans in the House will get and receive most of the credit for forcing Dubai to give way.And the Dems,where are they?
When the Senate passed the new,improved,Patriot act,well it was almost like catching your lover in bed with someone other than yourself.When four Republicans returned to the nest,nearly all opposition went with them.What does that say about Democrats?Four moderate Republicans stand up to Bush and I guess those four provided covering shelter for the Dems.After Rove gave the four Republican mutineers a sample of that"Ole Rove's Wicked Magic"the four returned,their votes and their brain cells changed forever.
Now as far as I can figure it,the Dems united could have held a filibuster.With GW down in the polls,the time was perfect for a test of resolve.But the old guard Dems in the leadership are so afraid of being called soft on terror that the spines that were nurtured by a paltry four Republicans quickly desolved and the the Dems resumed their positions of supplication.Every person,and especially the Dem's that voted for the"New and improved Patriot Act"should be ashamed to even walk among real people.You sold out some of our rights so you can pretend that you too have done your part in reducing America to a slightly less grand democracy;I mean you voted to make it harder for terrorists to reduce America's grand Democracy.
Anyway ,I kept a list of all ten Senators that voted against Renewel.Those ten are the only ones that will ever earn my vote if they ever run for ahigher office.The rest of the Dems that voted for renewal are gone from me forever.
Some of you are the same that spoke so strongly against the AG when he answered questions about the wiretaps.All Democrats in DC know full well that Bush will go beyond the legal and ethical lines that are law.Yet you renew this so called patriot act solely to cover your asses.Shame on all of you.I would have really enjoyed voting for Ms.Clinton;I voted twice for her husband and was proud of it.I voted in 04 for Mr. Kerry and would have again in 08.Not now,not ever.I'm Done.I will never again vote for the lesser of two evils.And all you traitors that voted for renewal,well maybe I'll have no reason to go to the polls.It's a sorrowful day.The United States was diminished,we must hope it may someday be reborn.David Williams in western NC

Mr. Thompson, your "a plague upon both their houses!" attitude is understandable. Your cynicism is well known, and to a certain extent, it is also justified. Unfortunately, I believe that you are at least partially wrong. Yes, both sides have shown a great deal of venality, shortsightedness, and only a passing familiarity with the truth. No question. Even so, there is the matter of collective intent, and of scale.

Frankly, even if the two parties truly were equally culpable, I would still vote my conscience (which means primarily Democratic). The Democratic Party's stated views on most issues tend to mirror my own. Yes, I would love to see stronger, more ethical leaders in both parties, and I always vote for the person I believe to be the best candidate. But in the absense of a compelling candidate for whom to vote, I choose the policy that makes the most sense to me.

Where you and I truly disagree, though, is your stated opinion that there is no distinction between the parties. Simply put, this is not true. The fact that you advocate that view makes you an unwitting pawn if the Republican propaganda machine. There is a weight of wrongdoing in Republican administrations---and especially this one---that dwarfs anything the last four democratic presidents have ever attempted.

The warrantless spying on Americans, the extreme manipulation of questionable intelligence to force an unnecessary and disastrous war, the lies and manipulations...all of these are far worse than even Watergate. No democratic administration has ever indulged in such excesses.

Yes, Mr.Thompson, both sides have been weak, corrupt, and self-interested. Both sides have given more time and effort to being re-elected and lining their own pockets than serving the people. I agree. And maybe a pox upon both their houses is justified. But do not presume to tell anyone that both sides have been equally corrupt, or equally bad for the country.

That's not true. You yourself are lying if you say so.

I agree with Mr. Hochberg. You cannot honestly tell me that both parties are equally to blame for the slide into fascism. Although the Demos. have been spineless in this regard I doubt you would have ever found any of them stacking up the number of ruthless power grabs this President and his gang have engineering. The GOP has only 1 issue and thats Terror and they are the one's doing most of the terrorizing these days. Clinton's crimes pall before what this administration has done. Start with the 2500 dead GI's for a phony war against a strawman and then add all the rest of the endless crimes this criminal regime has gotten away with and you cannot IMHO even begin to compare all of it to what Bill Clinton did in his entire 8 yrs.

Doug -

From some of the comments here, many Americans still just don't get it. They WANT desperately to believe that the major political parties in America are independent and somehow different. Unfortunately, many Americans are still living on Fantasy Island. The brainwashing of America has been a masterful performance. Carroll Quigley wrote about the manipulation of both major political parties by the SAME forces:

The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War). … The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. … Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies. [Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (New York: Macmillan, 1966), pp. 1247-1248.]

Yes, the WILLFUL blindness of far too many continues, the Fantasy Island syndrome.

Granted, the Dems leave a lot to be desired, but if you don't vote, you are playing right into the neocons evil hands. Take a look at Russ Feingold, senator from Wisconsin. He was the only senator to vote against the war in Iraq. That gives him a lot of stature in my book. He also voted against both Patriot Acts. I believe he's a man of principle.

I refer to your comment: "Yet no President in modern times is, or was, an honorable man."

Well, I suppose that during the four or eight years of a president's tenure, and given all the pies he has his fingers in, it is probably inevitable that at one time or another, at least one of his staff or cabinet secretaries will be found to have been less than honest.

Can you name any president who was toatally squeaky clean?

It seems to me that Jimmy Carter comes out looking better than most, notwithstanding Bert Lance. And consider all the fine work he's done at the Carter Centre.

And how about Dwight Eisenhower, who, in his farewell speech to the American people, warned them about the military industrial complex?

Gerald Ford is another president who comes to my mind as a decent man, although it could be said that he wasn't in office long enough to get into trouble.

Well, yes, Ford did get flack for pardoning Nixon, but a persuasive case can be made that he acted judiciously here, since a trial would have exacerbated the wounds left behind by Watergate, and all that went with it.

I fail to understand how any informed citizen is unable to see that both the Gop and the Dems are but one in the same. They each may offer token sound bytes as window dressing, but the fact is the substance is just the same.

Just for the record the United States is not a true to form democracy it is a representitive republic.

Ignorance is truly bliss.

Learn the truth. Take no one in powers word for anything. Research the issues from multiple sources and vet the facts.

The only way to regain some semi-balance of control in our government is for the people to participate not only through voting but by learning the issues and making informed decisions.

"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."
Thomas Jefferson

I saw a widow decal yeaterday that said..."W 1st President 4Life". God I hope not!

I agree with T.P Reitzel. The neocons are just the result of the same shinanigans that have been going on between both major parties for the last 50 years. These parties do not represent 'Americans', they represent the economic elite and pander to whatever special interest groups they must in order to maintain power in the interim. The elite get richer, they get richer, and you get slowly screwed.

The neocons are only the result of the system, and the system is screwed.

If you think not, just ask yourself this question:

"Is it reasonbly possible that a third party will ever take power in America under the status quo?"

Of course, the answer is 'no'. And why is that?

Because the voters won't allow it?

Why is that?

Because the voters are completely brainwashed into believing they must vote for either a Rep. or Dem. Mass media conditioning bought with big money. And if a reformist ever came long, he would be squashed before he even got near high office.

Until you have election reform, you are doomed to follow a path that's been charted for you.

But that's all pre-fascism stuff. The soft fascism that we see now complicates the matter even further.

I have to both agree and disagree with you Mr. Thompson. Hate to be so namby pamby. On the one hand I agree that the Dems are also pretty bad. Both parties have been doing things throughout the world for decades that, if the American people had a clue, would freak them out. Consider East Timor. The US sold weapons to Indonesia for 'defense' and the Indonesians used them to just slaughter maybe 200,000 Timoreans, in the most horrific ways. This went on from the time of Kennedy, through LBJ, and all other administrations, both Dem and Rethug.

And now it's happening all over again! West Papuans are being slaughtered, maybe 100,000 by now, with complicity by the US, Britain, and Australia. West Papua has lots of resources, and Indonesia wants them, and so do the multinationals. See the article "The Secret War" in truthout. (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/030906D.shtml)

Of course, Iraq is in the same vein, only this time the US government is more directly involved in a resource grab.

So I agree. But I also disagree, because NEVER did the Dems look like they might be on the verge of transforming the US into a dictatorship, even a theocracy. Yeah, they're mean venal sons of bitches whose only motivation seems to be greed, but at least they sort of paid attention to the Constitution. They are by far the lesser of two evils, because if the US becomes a tyranny then who knows what hell the Rethugs will visit on the rest of the world, or even on its own citizens?

Just about every poster here, and maybe you too, Doug, needs to reread Washington's farewell address. He roundly condemned the whole concept of political parties as divisive, the perfect description of their real purpose. It's the reason the money boys keep two of them on puppet strings but refuse to spend money on a strong third. Political parties are private clubs (owned by the same money in most cases). Who the hell ever gave them the right to chose our elected officers? For that is exactly what they do. They have long ago manipulated the law to have their choices printed on the ballots, which gives them a guarantee of winning practically every election. Also, they have put money into promoting these clubs as too massive to be practically opposed - through their wholly prostituted media. How many write in candidates have you seen elected? So your vote, which most of you hold as hallowed, is really subverted before you ever get to the primary voting booth. You can vote for prostitute to big money number one or prostitute to the same big money number two. Big deal. Why the hell vote? It's a waste of time and energy and extremely degrading to listen to all those prostitutes' phony campaign lies, hoping against hope to find some real reason to choose one over the other. And when the false charade is over, big money wins and the rest of us get screwed. Every time. No matter what. No matter if the winner is party one or party two. That's how it always ends up in any kind of "self government." Because the power mad know that most of the people will not, can not, spend all their time righting the purposely upside down political machine. Therefore the great majority will be almost totally ignorant of real politics making it a simple matter for the wholly prostituted media to manipulate their ignorance with spin and false debate on any issues allowed to surface.

The vote is a dead issue, forget it. It is frankly impossible to right our political wrongs through the vote. It just wastes another two or four years, whatever, of your life's energy for each prefixed election. Read Tom Jefferson to rediscover what will have to be done with our "elected" congress and executive to start over. State officers too.

I find it perplexing, watching the news and the story from Memphis Tenn, on "picking a new president", and they are talking republican this, and democrat that, and everyone is going to vote like it is business as usual, and I'm thinking what America do these guy's live in? the one I'm in feels like a fascist police state, I'm too afraid to stick my head out of the foxhole to vote! and If I did, I would probably end up on someone's hit list, it seems like there are two Americas?.....police state, or constitutional republic? I'm confused?

Tony B: writes:

Just about every poster here, and maybe you too, Doug, needs to reread Washington's farewell address. He roundly condemned the whole concept of political parties as divisive, the perfect description of their real purpose.

Tony:

Good point. I've quoted Washington's warnings about political parties more times than I can count. The problem is more than just political parties. It's partisanship in general, be it political or philosophical. The belief that one point-of-view should dominate a society founded on diversity is self-defeating and destructive.

Doug

James Hochberg writes:

Where you and I truly disagree, though, is your stated opinion that there is no distinction between the parties. Simply put, this is not true. The fact that you advocate that view makes you an unwitting pawn if the Republican propaganda machine. There is a weight of wrongdoing in Republican administrations---and especially this one---that dwarfs anything the last four democratic presidents have ever attempted.

I'm sorry but that sounds like a partisan cop-out. The "my side is bad but the other side is worse" argument ignores the problem that both parties, as well as the system, is corrupt. Until we start accepting the fact that neither party has the answer and the system, not the party in charge, must be changed we can never deal with the real problem.

Doug

I believe it is both reasonable and legitimate to state, as James Hochberg did, that "there is a weight of wrongdoing in Republican administrations---and especially this one---that dwarfs anything the last four democratic presidents have ever attempted." Saying that neither denys nor ignores the shortcomings and wrongdoing of either the Democrats or the system. It simply indicates that the Republicans have dragged us more deeply into corruption and further away from being able to fix the system so it might work better, and further away from the ideals of our country. Also, our current president has done an incredible amount of damage to our relationships with the people and the governments of all of the other countries of the world.

The weight of impact of various policies and actions is of much more concern than a simple count of bad policies and actions when evaluating the relative goodness or badness of any administration. But maybe the "shock" of our country getting dragged so far from its ideals is just what we've needed in order to wake up enough to try to actually DO something to get closer to our ideals than we ever have been. IF that turns out to be the case, then we might even be able to be somewhat thankful for how bad a president we have right now. Imagine that! So how do we fix the system? And who is going to do it, since most of the people in power, as well as the parties they represent, are part of the broken system?

It's easy to rant against who and what isn't working. What's more difficult is coming up with the answers that neither the Republican nor the Democrats have produced. What are your answers, Mr. Thompson?

Carl writes:

It's easy to rant against who and what isn't working. What's more difficult is coming up with the answers that neither the Republican nor the Democrats have produced. What are your answers, Mr. Thompson?

Carl:
I don't have answers. I wish I did. I've spent most of my adult life examining the failures of the system both as a journalist and a policial operative, and my only answer is that the system is truly flawed and cannot be corrected by partisan posturing.

Some years ago, I worked with others in Washington on a program called The Project for Comprehensive Campaign Reform. We offered alternatives to the current system, testified on Capitol Hill and tried to find ways to stem the corrupting effect of special interest groups. In the end, however, all our efforts failed because we were forced to pin our hopes on the very people who benefit most from the current system.

It will take a far wiser man than I to come up with an answer.

Doug

I've been a Republican since 1954 and have followed, supported, financed my GOP Congress and White House during all those years but in 1992 I saw a complete change in the platform and a global governance develop under Bush 41. American sovereignty was trashed and the U.S. Constitution was being changed to remove many individual rights and state's rights.

I chose a third party with Perot and then ended up in the LP because the Republicans and Democrats had all lost their love for American freedoms. I was a Reagan supporter because he had worked for fiscal responsibility (I thought) and wanted individual freedoms for all Americans (including women and gays).

I saw Clinton deal with our enemies and then saw Bush 43 return to the Empire Building of his father. Where was a party that represented me? It no longer exists! There is no longer a lesser of two evils and my frustration of having a great history of political activity has proven to be worthless and redundant.

It has come down to one agenda item and that is which party will allow Americans to live under their own moral values. Some are weak and some are strong but nowhere in my copy of the Constitution does it say that anyone has the right to develop my values by forced legislation.

The GOP has a party of moral values but is being run by corruption. This to me is far more dangerous than bopping an intern. I am totally shocked that so many of my Republican associates can justify the rotten actions of the President, his Administration and his corrupt members of the House. There has been a terrible stink in American politics since the day Bush took his oath of office.

I'm 73 years old and have managed to live a moral life without the Federal Government setting my standards. My standards are 10 times more moral than anything I have seen in the White House in the last 6 years.

Are the Democrats coming up with anything better? Just one; it will bring back the balance of power in D.C. and control the rotters running the government. Another 8 years of the Conservative Republicans and we will not have a country worth supporting.

To all the folks who belive the Dems are the lesser of 2 evils I ask where are they? What type of opposition party are the Dems? Do they really offer any viable alernatives to governing?
Note to America wake the fuck up!

I'm a democrat. I'm a republican. I'm a liberal. I'm a conservative. Thpppppppt. Do you feel all warm and comfy with your labels. Please continue to pigeon hole yourselves. Either lead follow or get the fuck out of the way.

a must read Scientific Evidence that Official 9/11 Story is a Lie [->http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=10464]

Doug Thompson writes:

It will take a far wiser man than I to come up with an answer.

Doug:
I think you are doing a hell of a great job so far.

Wally

your comments are all very interesting as well as the article but, 2 simple lessons from the bible whether you are believers or not both seem to bear witness to one of the original curses upon man that has resulted in war profiteering ever since applied, and the other lesson seems to provide the answer to the solution would be the moral from the babel towers, we are all different from each other for a grand design of a mysterious creator, and if we dont learn to accept we are all differrent we will obliterate ourselves, one of the first curses i was referring to would be the blessings of jacob and issac that has resulted in division and should be the theme that we should look forward to breaking if we are overcome. sorry for the run on unfragmented sentences, but that is just me.

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=10462 9-11 widow questions why MSNBC host silenced her

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=10464 9-11 widow questions why MSNBC host silenced her corrected link sorry, nice information to show your complicit congressmen

February Friday 17th 2006 (13h19) :
Conservatives Endorse the Fuhrer Principle - Our leader über alles
1 comment(s).
by Paul Craig Roberts
Last week’s annual Conservative Political Action Conference signaled the transformation of American conservatism into brownshirtism. A former Justice Department official named Viet Dinh got a standing ovation when he told the CPAC audience that the rule of law mustn’t get in the way of President Bush protecting Americans from Osama bin Laden.

Former Republican congressman Bob Barr, who led the House impeachment of President Bill Clinton, reminded the CPAC audience that our first loyalty is to the U.S. Constitution, not to a leader. The question, Barr said, is not one of disloyalty to Bush, but whether America "will remain a nation subject to, and governed by, the rule of law or the whim of men."

The CPAC audience answered that they preferred to be governed by Bush. According to Dana Milbank, a member of the CPAC audience named Richard Sorcinelli loudly booed Barr, declaring: "I can’t believe I’m in a conservative hall listening to him say Bush is off course trying to defend the United States." A woman in the audience told Barr that the Constitution placed Bush above the law and above non-elected federal judges.

These statements gallop beyond the merely partisan. They express the sentiments of brownshirtism. Our leader über alles.

Only a few years ago this same group saw Barr as a conservative hero for obtaining Clinton’s impeachment in the House. Obviously, CPAC’s praise for Barr did not derive from Barr’s stand on conservative principle that a president must be held accountable if he violates the law. In Clinton’s case, Barr’s principles did not conflict with the blind emotions of the politically partisan conservatives demanding Clinton’s impeachment.

In opposing Bush’s illegal behavior, Barr is simply being consistent. But this time, Barr’s principles are at odds with the emotions of the politically partisan CPAC audience. Rushing to the defense of Bush, the CPAC audience endorsed Viet Dinh’s Fuhrer Principle over the rule of law.

Why do the media and the public allow partisan political hacks, like Viet Dinh, to define Bush’s illegal actions as a national security issue? The purpose of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is to protect national security. FISA creates a secret court to which the president can apply for a warrant even after he has initiated spying. Complying with the law in no way handicaps spying for national security purposes. The only spying handicapped by the warrant requirement is spying for illegitimate purposes, such as spying on political opponents.

There are only two reasons for Bush to refuse to obey the law. One is that he is guilty of illegitimate spying for which no warrant would be issued by the FISA court. The other is that he is using "national security" to create unconstitutional powers for the executive.

Civil libertarian Harvey Silverglate writing in the Boston Phoenix says that Bush’s grab for "sweeping, unchecked power in direct violation of a statute would open a Pandora’s box of imperial possibilities." In short, it makes the president a dictator.

For years, the Republican Federalist Society has been agitating for concentrating more power in the executive. The members will say that they do not favor a dictator, just a check on the "imperial Congress" and "imperial judiciary." But they have not spelled out how the president can be higher than law and still be accountable, or, if he is only to be higher than some laws, but not other laws, and only in some circumstances, but not all circumstances, who draws the line through the law and defines the circumstances.

On Feb. 13, the American Bar Association passed a resolution belatedly asking President Bush to stop violating the law. "We cannot allow the U.S. Constitution and our rights to become a victim of terrorism," said bar association president Michael Grecco.

The siren call of "national security" is all the cover Bush needs to have the FISA law repealed, thus legally gaining the power to spy however he chooses, the protection of political opponents be damned. However, Bush and his Federalist Society Justice Department are not interested in having the law repealed. Their purpose has nothing to do with national security. The point on which the regime is insisting is that there are circumstances (undefined) in which the president does not have to obey laws. What those circumstances and laws are is for the regime to decide.

The Bush regime is asserting the Fuhrer Principle, and Americans are buying it, even as Bush declares that America is at war in order to bring democracy to the Middle East.

http://antiwar.com

in the near projected future and since the end of the korean war we have spent or will spend more combined than the rest of the world has throughout known history. why on earth would they have to hide behind arcane national secrecy laws? and cannot gonzaled be suspended or disbarred for blatantly ignoring the constitution?

February Friday 17th 2006 (13h31) :
How Conservatives Went Crazy
1 comment(s).
by Paul Craig Roberts What happened to a formerly conservative press to reduce it to political partisanship and warmongering? Specifically, I have in mind National Review and the Wall Street Journal editorial page.
When I was associated with National Review, the magazine understood that the U.S. Constitution and civil liberties had to be protected from government. It was not considered unpatriotic to take the side of the Constitution and civil liberties against a sitting government, even if the government were Republican. Some things were still more important than party loyalty.

No more. Consider, for example, Byron York writing in the Feb. 13 issue. York doesn’t understand why former U.S. Representative Bob Barr lent his Republican conservative credentials to former Vice President Al Gore’s speech against President Bush’s transgressions against law and civil liberty, or why Barr is associating with liberals opposing the "PATRIOT" Act.

Barr is the former Republican member of the House of Representatives who led the impeachment against President Bill Clinton. Barr did so not out of political partisanship. As a former prosecutor, Barr regards lying under oath to be a serious offense. A president who commits that offense must be held accountable. Otherwise, presidents will go on to lie about greater things - such as war.

In opposing Bush’s transgressions, Barr is simply being consistent. For Barr, party loyalty takes a back seat to defense of the Constitution, the rule of law, and civil liberty. If the U.S. had more leaders of Barr’s caliber, Bush and Cheney would already have been impeached.

York cannot understand this, because he thinks party loyalty and defense against terrorists are the controlling virtues. York scolds Barr for letting himself be used by partisan liberal organizations, but York takes his own partisanship for granted. It is only the other side that is partisan.

When I was on the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page, the editorials were analytical and reformist. Sometimes we broke news stories. The page’s attention to the Soviet Union was based on the rulers’ aggressive posture and suppression of civil liberties. Today, the editorial page is a fount of neoconservative war propaganda. All intelligence has vanished.

Consider the "Review & Outlook" of Feb. 3, which declares Iran to be "an intolerable threat." Iran is portrayed as a threat because the country’s new president has used threatening rhetoric against Israel. But, of course, Bush and Israel are constantly using threatening rhetoric against Iran. To avoid being regarded as a wimp by his countrymen and by the Muslim world, the new Iranian president has to answer back. It doesn’t occur to the editorialists that Iranians might see the nuclear weapons of Israel and the U.S. as intolerable threats.

Unlike Iran, Israel does have nuclear weapons. In view of this overpowering fact, it is difficult to see why Bush and Wall Street Journal editorialists think the U.S. needs to protect Israel from Iran.

But what if Iran were to succeed in fooling the International Atomic Energy Agency’s nuclear inspectors and develop a bomb. Might not crazed mullahs drop it on Israel or give it to an al-Qaeda terrorist, who might use it to blow up Washington, D.C., or New York?

What would Iran gain aside from its own immediate destruction? If mutual assured destruction worked for decades against a powerfully armed communist state every bit as hostile to American "bourgeois capitalism" as Iran is to the "Great Satan," why would it fail against a state that is puny compared to Soviet standards?

Iran does not require nuclear weapons in order to do all the things the editorialists marshal in their case against Iran. Indeed, a U.S. or Israeli attack on Iran is likely to precipitate the dire deeds that the editorialists fear: a Shia uprising in Iraq, disruption of oil supplies, closing of the Straits of Hormuz, and terrorist attacks throughout the Middle East.

It is difficult to see the sanity in taking such risks merely on the basis of the assumption that Iran intends to make a weapon. Before attacking yet another Muslim country on the basis of mere assertion and creating further anger and instability that may unseat our puppets in the Middle East, including nuclear-armed Pakistan, the U.S. would do far better to drop its threatening rhetoric, reestablish cooperation with Iran, continue the IAEA inspections, and wait until there is real evidence of a nuclear weapons program.

The U.S. rushed to war in Iraq based on lies. On PBS (Feb. 3), Lawrence Wilkerson, who was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, said that the Iraq speech his boss was forced to give to the UN was "a hoax on the American people, the international community, and the United Nations Security Council."

The consequences have been disastrous. The U.S. invasion force is tied down by a few thousand insurgents drawn from a Sunni population of merely 5 million people, and Iraq has become, according to the CIA, a recruiting and training ground for terrorists. The invasion has ruined America’s reputation and expanded the popularity of al-Qaeda, which has assumed the stand-up role against the hegemonic Great Satan.

It is the untutored belligerence of the neoconservative Jacobins that is likely to send the Middle East up in smoke. The instability that Bush is creating serves al-Qaeda’s interests, not our own.

The U.S. and Iran have common enemies in al-Qaeda and Middle East instability. Iran is Shia. Al-Qaeda is a movement drawn from Sunnis. The age-old Shia/Sunni conflict may yet lead to civil war in Iraq.

When the Wall Street Journal editorialists describe Iran’s current leaders as "possessed of an apocalyptic vision," they could just as well be describing Bush’s evangelical supporters and the neocon Jacobins that are driving America to impose the neocon will on the Middle East. This is the program of lunatics. No conservative could possibly support it.

antiwar.com

March Saturday 11th 2006 (15h53) :
DOES GEORGE BUSH BOTHER YOU?
1 comment(s).
Does George Bush Bother You?
By Peter Fredson

March 11, 2006

I don’t care how much brush George cuts down on that ex-pig farm that he calls a ranch. I don’t care how many barbecues he has there, or if he strums a guitar, eats cake, watches TV, eats pretzels, rides bicycles, or gets on with his life in Crawford, Texas. He can spend his entire life strutting, swaggering, and smirking there. In fact, he can do anything the Texas Rangers will not stop. That doesn’t bother me.

As long as it does not affect me, he can swim naked, rant and rave at this family, scratch his butt, take pills, pray day or night, eat crackers in bed, catch crawfish, shake dandruff off his head, squeeze a pimple, play the hump-backed beast with Laura, or sodomize Karl Rove. Whatever. I couldn’t care less.

I would never bother him, call him, worry about him, or include him in any of my plans. I might dislike his petulance, his privileged background, his unearned wealth, his dependence on his powerful daddy, his irresponsible attitude, his perpetual lies, his smirking, and most of his friends, like Bolton and Rove. But all of that doesn’t bother me a whit or a tittle or a smidgeon. He could live that life from birth to natural death, undisturbed by me.

But, the instant that his actions affect my well-being, my privacy, my safety, my family, my health, my costs, my choices, or any one of my constitutional rights, is when I say “enough.” And, I must say “enough” now. It is very rare that I feel a “hate” of people. My experiences in World War II, seeing thousands of deaths on sandy beaches, seeing the Dachau concentration camp with its skeletal occupants (the victims of beyond horrible,) determined me to do everything possible to avoid the hatred I saw.

But I am seeing replays of the Nazi administration of Germany, the tyranny without end, the spying, secret camps, wire taps, arrests without warrant, kidnapping, renditions, indefinite detention, despising the Geneva Conventions, despising our own Constitution and assumption of dictatorial prerogatives.

Above all the disregard of human life, the abuse and torture, the deliberate degradation, the secrecy, the atmosphere of fear that affected the entire population and made them whisper softly lest a Hitlerian sycophant turn them over to some death squad, the knocks on the door at night, lack of legal counsel, the complete disregard for legalities, and a hundred other acts of viciousness that are now being replayed by the Bush bullies led to an egomaniac, irritable, petulant, dangerous sociopath who loved to strut and swagger in uniform.

I had a very small part in helping to start the Nuremburg trials and saw the end results with the Nazi bullies committing suicide or dangling from the gallows. I saw the newsreels of Benito Musssolini, beaten to death by mobs, hanging dead by his heels.

Evidently George Bush thinks that his imperial manners will protect him for all time in all ways and that no court of retribution will ever find him. Most dictators think that way. They live for the present, surround themselves with guards, and imagine that they are immune or impervious in their bubble of faith.

We do have impeachment as a remedy but most Republican Senators will expend all their energy and eloquence in protecting George Bush at all costs. If he goes, most of them too will go. So as long as we have sycophants in Congress there is little possibility of any impeachment movement succeeded.

A John Warner will block it with cunning maneuvers. A Trist will find ways to negate it. A Santorum will talk himself hoarse to avoid it. A Hastert will shout it out of existence.

Such people lack a sense of responsibility to protect and defend our Constitution, being deaf and dumb in order to protect their own office-holding cherished prerogatives and do not want “to rock the boat” with its juicy jobs, corrupt influences and good old boy intimacy. Unless, and until the public demands that they get off their hind ends and act like Senators who seriously intend to preserve our separation of powers instead of being butt-kissers to a petulant, irritable, ignorant oaf.

We continue with our tyrannical, bullying, imperial Presidency that is manipulated by many powerful influences. And we remain hopeful that enough Senators will join the movement to impeach or otherwise restrain this incompetent person from inflicting further damage and cost to our democracy in favor of his neocon corporate theocracy.

At present there are only very small signs of this happening, but history shows us what finally happens to tyrants. Let’s hope it is sooner than later.

Meanwhile many Americans must cower in fear of some unknown enemy produced by Bush and the known Bush tyrant in our midst.

By : peter fredsib
March Saturday 11th 2006

george bush is just wrong. plain and simple he is un american and misrepresents every value that our nation used to stand for, and makes me ashamed that i ever enlisted.

In Memoriam For Joan LoDato

http://www.wine-storage.com/octopus.html

Simpleton Says: It makes sense to me
its radical but has anyone else got a better plan? http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=10306

Bush and Cheney were illegally spying on Americans BEFORE 9/11 http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=10291 by :Jason Leopold

The time for debating the state of political affairs in the US is now a mute point. The Country is finished and so is the rest of the world. There are three superpowers in the world. One of them has attacked their own country and citizens in order to create an illusionary war on terror. That phony war has now gave birth to two other phony wars and is now about to give birth to a third phony war, with an attack on Iran. Tactical weapons of a nasty sort have not been ruled out, which means they will probably be used. It is one thing to to attack your own country, and also quite insane, but it is another thing entirely, to do it in the back yard of two great powers who are not only both investing in Iran, they have been conducting joint military excercises for some time now. If anyone with an internet connection and half a brain can spend twenty minutes researching 911 and determine that it was a US and Israeli operation, so obviously orchestrayted, that it should have been exposed within the first week, do you think that those two superpowers dont know. It was an act of insanity and that is why they have gotten away with it thus far, as it is an unbelieveable act of insanity. High school students are making movies about it. The whole world knows about it, that is except, the majority of the American People. Your media is controlled by the same lunatics that your politicians are. Do you think for one minute that those two superpowers are not aware of what has been going on, do you really think that they are going to let this insanity go
on. They will not, they can not. Its all about 911, its all about 911, its all about 911, expose it dam it! and quit wasting valuable time, trying to debate how to fix a corrupt political system.

We can't expose it. When I show the videos to Bush voters they say it is all lies. They want to believe the lies, or they would feel helpless like we do. Our option is to hit the streets and shot down one at a time! We have a weak and apathetic public, young people don't CARE.

The mainstream media would not touch it with a ten foot pole because they ARE CORPORATE OWNED. Get it, we are totally censored and half these dumbshits don't even read. We are trapped in a nightmare, within a nightmare!

You are probably right checkers, there is nothing much that can be done, we are going down, our media up here is the same, and thus we are just as guilty, North America is the mystery Babylon in the book of Revelations and it is destroyed in one hour. May the Lord have mercy on our souls.

Have you tried to contact REAL members of Congress, like Dr. Paul and Cynthia McKinney, Doug? If not, why not? All this venting and ranting means NOTHING to those in power. They do what the hell they want, when they want, and the rights of the "cattle" be damned. Doug, with all of your connections on the inside, you could persuade AT LEAST one of them to begin to expose those genuine traitors on the inside.

I have watched this nightmare play itself out for over four years. I have had a sitting US REPRESENTATIVE tell me to my face the truth, as we were discussing what has been happening to our country, and what happens? NOT A DAMNED THING. When I say the truth, I mean THE truth, not the false left/right bullshit. For the most part this person is alone and scared and depressed because NO ONE else for the most part is doing a damned thing about any of this.

Pick your false-flag operation: OKC where the agents on the scen DE-ACTIVATED THREE DEVICES that did not go off from INSIDE the building and then had Gov. Frank Keating say that they were going to get to the bottom of what happened by seeing who designed the devices, 911 WHERE DO YOU BEGIN, London's 7/7 where Visor Consulting headed up by the ex-spokesman of Scotland Yard Peter Power was conducting drills of a terrorist attack at the exact locations at the exact times where Verint Systems was running security and hasn't released the videos from inside the tube, British SAS agents in Basra posing as Arabs killing Iraqi policeman and then when they were finally stopped having their car laden with explosives and then were busted out of Basra with tanks to make their escape, and lastly but NEVER leastly the USS Liberty where our soldiers were murdered by our "ally" to make it look like Egypt led the attack to bring us into what would amount to a WORLD WAR just what Operation Northwoods in 1961 and PNAC on September 17, 2000 called for in their use of the term "a new Pearl Harbor style attack on America"!!!!!!!!!!!

Jesus Christ, Doug, how much more???????????? How much longer are you just going to rant and rave until you realize that you have to have someone from the inside go public and expose this treason once and for all. Once that happens, the house of cards collapses. Until then, all of your ranting and raving means nothing but dots on a computer screen. That is until those camps are built and the sedition laws are re-enacted and all of those brain-dead morons watching FNC or CNN or any of the other propaganda machines, including those on the alternative side, go right along with these traitors and begin to put an end to ANY chance of exposing this once and for all.

How could you sleep at night if you did not at the very least beg and plead with AT LEAST ONE of these people to take a stand for once in their solitary lives and do something that makes a damned difference for humanity.

God knows that I have and that I have had my small successes, and I am just a regular guy working in the service industry, for Christ's sake. But until we come together as a whole and realize that YOU DO have the power to make this happen, we ARE the worthless un-clean, un-chosen, "cattle and dogs" that they believe we are.

PROVE THEM WRONG.

www.whatreallyhappened.com
www.prisonplanet.com www.prisonplanet.tv
www.iamthewitness.com

WAKE UP PEOPLE, because this IS the "Endgame." REX-84, the program for building concentration camps in America designed by Lt. Col. Oliver North, was known twenty years ago. All of this is now being implemented through the $385 million contract given to KBR to build "detention centers" for special programs requiring additional detention space. Did you "rant" about that? REX-84 was when YOU were in DC, right, Doug? You knew about the hearings where Lt. Col. North was confronted about this and what did you do? You worked for the re-election campaign of Reagan and his handler "Poppy Bush" right?

I don't know what to think now that I have seen all that I have seen, but you people had better begin asking the HARD questions and demanding the HARD answers because this is it.

Not at ANY point in time have I ever seen you, Doug, present evidence of the greatest lie ever perpetrated on the American people, and that is the lie of 911. The other actions such as the activities of COINTELPRO, MK-ULTRA, Tuskeegee, and the like pale in comparison to the actions of these traitorous maniacs' coup of our nation on that day, yet not one word from you the bastion of truth and justice in politics. Your silence is DEAFENING.

You have hit the nail on the head, Expose The Zionists, at it is right at the top of this column, where Doug mentions "a teflon presidency", what presidency Doug, are you talking about? Start working on 911, get the pictures on your site, interview Stephen Jones, interview the courageous young man who made "loose change" there is no point in worrying about them getting to you, they are out kill us all anyway. And it is imminent!

Dat Dubya, he jus doan love hiss inturns like he shudd. He is a momma's boy. Das wut.

THE QUESTION ONE SHOULD ASK IS...WHAT PRESIDENT HAS CAUSED THE MOST DAMAGE TO OUR NATION AS A WHOLE WHILE IN OFFICE...I DON'T SEE HOW ANYONE COULD HONESTLY ANSWER ANYTHING OTHER THAN G.W.BUSH AND I VENTURE TO SAY THAT HISTORIANS WILL AGREE.

I am always appalled at the comments by many that still believe there is a practical difference between the two parties.

My rule of thumb is that if they violate the Constitution, they are one and the same - traitors to America.

The two major parties, and the whole of their membership, have consistently without fail violated their Oaths of Office.

Had they upheld their Oaths to protect our shores and defend our rights secured by limiting the federal government, we would still be free people not obtaining government's permission to do what we have the right to do. This in every behavior known, other than intentionally harming another or intentionally damaging another's property.

We would not be in Iraq.

We would not have bombed Afghanistan back to "the Stone Age".

We would not still be in Afghanistan.

We would not have allowed teh US Government to overthrow (and usually murder leaders) the governments of 50 or so other countries.

We would have no income tax.

We would not be subjected to the Federal Reserve System with our currency owned and controlled through fraud.

We would not have been in WW I, WW II, Korea, Vietnam, nor would be under the 'rule' of the U.N. At least the American people were still informed enough at the close of WW I to deny the government becoming part of teh League of Nations.

I could go on but the point is that every atrocity the US Government commits around the world, and against the American people - gun control, the anti-Patriots rules (that cannot apply to the people), courts that are not courts of law and justice, and so on for thousands of examples - has been done by the two major parties.

None of the leadership of these parties - whether federal, State (now acting as private corporations), and the State's creations known as City of ____ and County of _____ (chartered corporations), have worked to stop the overthrow and oppression on inherent, inalienable rights of human beings.

History shows that none of the horrible acts done by government against the American people would have occurred had the two major parties not been acting with one intent - to establish complete (plenary) control over our people and the world's resources.

Doug--Arrogant,yes. Insufferable too. Unfortunately, Bush and Co (the Co is where the ideology, strategy and program implementation come from) have been extremely effective. And keep getting away with it. Putin has used the same sort of tactics in Russia, but he already had a secret police structure to reverse the brief democratic rebellion. The Bush regime hasn't quite created that yet, but no one is doing much to stop them.

We have reached that point of dormancy at which a majority of non-voters looking for safe streets and convinced that their leadership is honorable has allowed a determined group of clever fanatics to chip away at their freedom, destroy the economy, and get us into yet another war we can't possibly win.

The long-term economic consequences are the scariest. Where is the money to run the country going to come from,when you have branded taxes as something even more dangerous than abortion or Godlessness and when there are few jobs paying decent wages?

How do we get out of this? With a new face, a new leader, and a coherent program that enough apathetic or politically ignorant people can understand. We do still have vote. If the Democrats could persuade the country and NRA that logically the Bush bunch WILL TAKE AWAY YOUR GUNS to keep "terrorists" from getting them, maybe people will wake up. But where are the leaders?

I doubt that we will get a fascist state a la Mussolini, but I can see a scenario where these policies lead to a potentially violent response to repression disguised as "security." It is not a pretty prospect.

Ken Thompson

Doug, not everyone expects you to come up with answers---it's enough that you bring out the problems in clear enough language that all can see them.

Keep up the good work!

Doug: Since you pride yourself on accuracy in reporting, please stop repeating the falsehood that Bill Clinton "lied to a federal grand jury." That's simply untrue...yet has become part of the "urban myth" vernacular of today.

If you wish to make this false charge, please specify what said perjury was: Since perjury is about the MOST SPECIFIC crime there is, what precisely was the question and what exactly was the perjurious answer?

The truth is, that Clinton answered "no" to a specific, absurb THREE-PAGE definition of "sexual relations" concocted by Paula Jones' attorneys in a DEPOSITION for a civil rights suit bought and paid for by conservative Richard Mellon Scaife. They concocted this "definition"--which would have included patting someone on their clothed behind, by the way--because they had met the night before at Linda Tripp's house--where she was driven by Kenneth Starr's deputy, Brett Kavanaugh (who has been rewarded--even though he had to resign for leaking grand jury testimony--by a recent lifetime appt. to the federal courts and was on the short list for the Supreme Court).

Having illegally taped telephone conversations in Maryland at the behest of former Nixon "Dirty Trickster" Lucianne Goldberg, Ms. Tripp had told the Jones lawyers that Ms. Lewinsky had only engaged in oral sex with the President (so your "screwed interns" line is also incorrect, esp. in the plural), but they wanted to be able to leak (illegally) an affirmative answer to "sexual relations" so they wanted to make the pronouncement "fit the crime" (even though, of course, there WAS no underlying crime). That is how his response--which, by the way, was technically true...their definition didn't encompass HER doing something to him, only him to her...came about.

By the time he testified before the GRAND JURY in August 1998 (7 months later), Mr. Clinton knew all about the illegally taped calls, Ms. Lewinsky's FIVE appearances in front of the grand jury (at taxpayers' expense), and DNA tests on a dress that she somehow was conned into not cleaning for TWO YEARS by Tripp and Goldberg--in close consultation with Starr's law partner, Richard Porter of Kirkland and Ellis.

Since you're such a civil libertarian, as am I, THESE are the kinds of actions that should TRULY concern you and the nation, rather than private, intermittent consensual behavior between adults.

I have watched Clinton's entire grand jury testimony (4-1/2 hours worth) TWICE...to see if I could find this supposed "perjury"...and can't see any answer that could even remotely fall into that category! In fact, he begins the testimony by reading a prepared statement fully acknowledging "inappropriate conduct on several occasions with Ms. Lewinsky"--for which he apologizes.

You may say this is semantics...when it is actually THE LAW!!! Where is your outrage that Republicans in Congress were so hell-bent on staging a "constitutional coup" to unseat a twice duly-elected President that they NEVER EVEN SPECIFIED in the Articles of Impeachment they voted for WHAT THE QUESTION WAS and WHAT THE PERJURIOUS ANSWER ENTAILED!!!!!

Imagine: to constitute perjury a statement under oath must be demonstrably false, of a material nature to the case (which was thrown out on summary judgement as "without merit"), not liable to varied interpretation or confusion, and the witness must KNOW that his statement is unequivocally false at the time he makes it.

Yet those who pushed and voted for impeachment NEVER identified the precise words or circumstances of this supposed illegal act. And now, even EIGHT YEARS LATER, you are still perpetuating this egregious overstatement.

Additionally, in your "stretch" to paint Clinton's presidency as "just as bad as Bush's," you somehow make him responsible for one of his former lawyer's TAX PROBLEMS (did he fill out Hubbell's tax returns or advise him thereon?--and only came out when Starr demanded documents for which Hubbell supposedly had immunity...then was charged on--AGAIN, where's your outrage?) as well as Mike Espy accepting two NCAA finals basketball tickets FROM HIS COLLEGE ROOMMATE... which led to THE LONGEST Independent Prosecutor investigation IN HISTORY (costing the taxpayers nearly $20 million), which resulted in a $100 fine. And again, how was Clinton responsible for Mike Espy going to a ballgame?

It's easy to be a curmudgeon, Doug...and otherwise I GREATLY ADMIRE your outspokenness and integrity...but to equate the MOST SUCCESSFUL presidency in modern times with likely THE WORST in history is an embarrassment.

This "everybody stinks" attitude is precisely what the Republicans WANT these days: somehow the Abramoff affair has become "a bipartisan scandal," the fault for Katrina "can be laid at all levels of government," the Clinton Administration "also believed Saddam had WMD" (perhaps, but he didn't INVADE a sovereign nation to find out!), and many administrations "have spied on citizens" (though not even Nixon as egregiously as this one).

Valid criticism is watered down when the attitude is "well, everyone does it"...and it is simply not true on nearly the scale that this bunch has practiced almost since the day Bush was APPOINTED.

And besides, what's past is PAST: our CURRENT dilemma as a nation is what to do with the MESS the PRESENT occupant of the White House has wrought! And while something can STILL be done!

While the Limbaughs, Hannitys, and O'Reillys of the world attempt to divert attention from that fact by harkening back SIX to FOURTEEN YEARS when Clinton was in office, I expect more rational thought and constructive dialogue from someone of your ilk.

It's one thing to RANT, another to have proportion and to put your efforts to their best, immediate and most relevant use.

Other than that, keep up the good work.

Chip:

Clinton lied under oath and that offense that you find so trivial was enough for an administrative judge to lift his license to practice law (and the story was corrected to clarify that).

I'm sorry but I can't accept your premise that the Clinton tenure was "the most successful presidency in modern times." Clinton disgraced the office of the Presidency but he hasn't been the only one.

In my opinion, based on eight years of covering the man while he was in the White House, is that he was, and is, a crook.

Doug

Doug,

Thanks for your considered and considerate reply. You responded to me that you "don't have answers" and that "It will take a far wiser man than I to come up with an answer." Well, I'm with you in that I don't have the answers either, but I think I know what we need to do to find them.

I appreciate your humble honesty, your past efforts and your current efforts. Though I may have sounded like I was complaining about your ranting, I believe you have been playing a valuable role in helping make problems better known and encouraging others to be fired up about them. No solutions will ever be found without recognition of the problems and the context that created them, and nothing will ever get fixed without enthusiastic effort. But no solutions will ever be found without a change in thinking. Einstein is quoted as having said "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

I'm wondering if The Project for Comprehensive Campaign Reform might have been an attempt at employing at least some new level of thinking. Or did it just involve restirring the same pot of soup that's been simmering for decades? Only really new ways of thinking will be able to surmount the blockages imposed by those who are in power and benefiting by the system as it is. It's their attachment to the status quo that makes them all so much the same, and that makes change so difficult to implement.

If we are angry about what we believe is wrong, that's great, unless we just stay angry. If we only stay angry, we only burn up energy spinning our wheels while accomplishing nothing. We need to recognize the ruts we've dug for ourselves and then get out of them, by dropping old patterns of reactive behavior and replacing them with new, more productive behaviors. Changing even the simplest things can begin to make a difference. For one small example, profanity is used by many here as a way to try to make strong statements, but it really doesn't add anything to either context nor clarity of understanding. It serves only to expend a great deal of energy that could be put to much better use, such as clarity of thought, feeling and action. The use of profanity actually distracts both users and readers from meaningful action and thus preserves the status quo. But it takes some new thinking to be able to see this.

We need to learn to be able to transform the energy of our anger into clearer insight and well planned and directed action. To be able to discern right action we need to learn to listen to our hearts. We need to see the world and human relations in different ways. There are some relatively new models and systems of thinking that as many of us as possible need to shift into so we can start making a real difference. Systems such as spiral dynamics and integral thinking can help us in this process. The systems don't provide the answers but they can give us new ways to find the answers.

To use our energy wisely, every effort needs to be directed positively and forward. Negativity is generally directed backward destructively against what was and is. The future is ahead and can only be elevated above what is and has been through positive creative efforts. If every problem that is found and exposed serves only to beat up on others, no progress will ever be made. If these problems are instead seen as opportunities to find solutions, then progress might be made.

And to make progress, it won't require a wiser man than you, Doug, No one of us will ever have the answers. It will require the collective wisdom of as many of us men and women as possible, all working together toward our future by creating solutions to our common problems and for our common interests.

So, who here is ready for this shift into forward gear for progress?

Doug,

I never said anything about finding Clinton's deposition response "trivial" -- you did.

However, much like those who always cite "the Second Amendment right to bear arms" WITHOUT noting that such refers to "a standing militia," it is disingenuous to say "Clinton lied under oath"--without noting that said testimony was about HIS PERSONAL, PRIVATE SEX LIFE!!"

Should YOU...or anyone else...have to discuss that -- esp. in a politically motivated civil suit in which your response will be (and was) leaked illegally as soon as you give it?

I mean, come on...you lumped that in with Bush's lies that have cost over a hundred thousand lives and stunning incompetence that has lost many more.

THAT is why I urged you to have a sense of proportion ... ranting about EVERYONE only reduces the effect of what you should REALLY be incensed about.

And while we're at it, throwing around comments like "an administrative judge lifted his license to practice law" is equally misleading...since it was part of a plea agreement which ENDED the case once and for all...and only applied to his practicing law IN ARKANSAS (which he was highly unlikely to do anyway, after having been President, and living in NY, don't you think?).

You are a fine journalist, Doug...but to say that someone "lied under oath to a grand jury" (when that is far from the case) or that "his license to practice law was lifted" (in only ONE STATE and to "make the case go away") is hardly evidencing journalistic accuracy and integrity.

Lastly, you're of course free to disagree with my statement that Clinton's was "the most successful presidency in modern times"--which it WAS, by any quantitative measure of the economy, deficit reduction, peace, international standing, environmental advances, being out ahead of Y2K, and on and on--but it shouldn't be due to a SUBJECTIVE statement that he "disgraced the office"--as if that negates all the positive developments during those 8 years.

And how can you evaluate the RELATIVE "moral" merits of individuals when ONLY ONE has been subjected to the unprecedented SCRUTINY and INVESTIGATION that Clinton was?

I think it's well known that Bush One had a 20 year affair with his assistant Jennifer Fitzgerald
--during which time she got 5 separate jobs on the government payroll and accompanied him to China when he was U.S. Ambassador for 18 months BEFORE Barbara Bush belatedly decided to join him.

Or that Bush paid for Fitzgerald's apartment in NYC when he was U.N. Ambassador during the ONLY time during that 20 year period that she WASN'T on his government payroll. I believe they call that "hush money" where you come from, Doug.

My point is that, for all we know, George and Laura Bush haven't had sex since they brought their decadent daughters into the world...or that he's been boffing Condi Rice for the better part of a decade. Who knows? Who cares??

I don't think it's our right to know such things, as long as it doesn't adversely affect one's performance in office (the only negative effect Clinton's private liaison had stemmed from being diverted by the $100 million+ effort to "ferret" it out). However, it is unfair to compare Clinton to others in terms of "character" when his is the only personal life we've been privy to.

Thanks for replying,
Chip