This is a good editorial about the new "swift boat" slime machine that has now turned its sights to the AARP and its opposition to Bush's Social Security privatization plan. For those of you who do not know, the original ad put out by USA next, a conservative citizens group, portrayed the AARP as hating our military and loving gay marriage (no of which is true). This ad, having nothing to do with the actual issue of social security, was created by the same forces that created the discredited "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth." Not only is this a cheap, mud slinging gimmick, but it is childish and stupid. If this is how the far right wants to frame the issues, I have enough confidence in the American people to see this as what it is... Slime from a slimy group. Talk about no class...
Swifties Slime Again
Thursday, February 24, 2005
GI Jesus
For anyone who regularly reads my blog, you know that I am anything but anti-military. A strong and efficient military is vital to the defense of our nation and interests around the world. I even almost ended up in the Air Force 2 different times, but this goes too far for me. Now the US military is promoting "men's night out" events at churches and using them as recruitment functions. Invading places of worship that teach peace and love is no place to recruit for war. Even more disturbing was that the recruiters used images of Jesus Christ in their presentation. This is an attack on my religion and faith.
See the picture show for yourself at shlonkom bakazay
See the picture show for yourself at shlonkom bakazay
Wednesday, February 23, 2005
Gannongate continues
Americablog has a letters from Reps. John Conyers (Ranking Member, House Judiciary Committee) and Louise Slaughter (Ranking Member, House Rules Committee) asking the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to include Jeff Gannon/James Guckert in an investigation of "whether the Administration violated the ban on prepackaged news stories by siphoning print stories to James D. Guckert, also known as "Jeff Gannon" (Link) and to US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald who is investigating the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame, today letting him know that he might want to subpoena Gannon's daily diary which may have information about who in the Bush Administration leaked Plame's name. (Link)
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
You Can't Spell Hypocrisy Without CCRKBA
This press release from the The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) is completely absurd. Obviously, they are not seeing the trees through the forest. CCRKBA is complaining that CNN's report on how a terrorist could use .50-caliber weapons is "sensational" and "The CNN report comes awfully close to being an attempt by a news organization to encourage an incident, just so CNN can later say 'We warned you'" is one of the most laughable arguments in recent history (the last being "it was a historical document"). Don't you kind of wish CNN had done a report on how terrorists could use passenger planes as weapons against us prior to 9/11... Maybe then someone would have perked up in the Bush administration and finally have a 'Counter terrorism meeting' of substance. I want people out there lighting the fire under the bureaucrats butts, not stifling their words.
And I also find it funny that CCRKBA criticizes CNN's words (1st Amendment) and says nothing about the actual guns (2nd Amendment). Lets not forget that it is the 1st Amendment that protects the 2nd Amendment. CCRKBA's press release (1st amendment) criticized CNN (1st Amendment). CCRKBA is a citizen group (1st Amendment) who lobbies congress (1st Amendment) to be able to keep guns.
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Blasts CNN Report Alerting Terrorists How to Obtain .50 Cal. Rifles
BELLEVUE, Wash., Feb. 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) today condemned a sensational report on CNN that not only alerts potential terrorists on possible misuses of .50-caliber sporting rifles, but also literally provides a "road map" on how to obtain one of these cumbersome and very expensive firearms.
"In yet another media attempt to demonize a particular firearm, which CNN's own reporter, Drew Griffin, acknowledged has 'really never been used domestically in a criminal event,' this outrageous report still suggests to potential terrorists how such a gun might be put to criminal use," said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb.
CCRKBA executive director Joe Waldron agreed, noting, "The CNN report comes awfully close to being an attempt by a news organization to encourage an incident, just so CNN can later say 'We warned you'. This sort of journalism belongs right down there with the CBS debacle over the manufactured documents regarding allegations about President Bush (news - web sites)'s service in the Texas Air National Guard. With so-called 'news' like this on the nation's airwaves, it is no wonder that the American public no longer trusts the media, and believes the press has a political agenda."
The CNN report focused on what might happen to a commercial jet aircraft if a terrorist fired at it with a .50-caliber rifle.
"Essentially, CNN's Griffin and anchor Paula Zahn have literally told would-be terrorists, 'See what you might do with one of these firearms'?" Gottlieb observed. "Naturally, if such an incident occurs, CNN will quickly blame everyone but themselves. That's not simply disingenuous, it's despicable. Of course, CNN isn't the only news agency guilty of planting this seed of an idea in the mind of some lunatic. CBS' '60 Minutes' did the same thing, and they're all hoping to one day harvest a bumper crop of sensational stories about some airplane that comes under fire."
"If the press handed out awards for irresponsible journalism," Waldron suggested, "CNN would certainly be in the running. Their own report admits these clumsy recreational firearms have not been a problem. Not satisfied with that, it appears CNN isn't just reporting news, it's trying to invent news, and in this case, that news could have tragic consequences. That's Jayson Blair journalism at its worst. CNN ought to be ashamed, but it's doubtful they know the definition of that word."
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
And I also find it funny that CCRKBA criticizes CNN's words (1st Amendment) and says nothing about the actual guns (2nd Amendment). Lets not forget that it is the 1st Amendment that protects the 2nd Amendment. CCRKBA's press release (1st amendment) criticized CNN (1st Amendment). CCRKBA is a citizen group (1st Amendment) who lobbies congress (1st Amendment) to be able to keep guns.
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Blasts CNN Report Alerting Terrorists How to Obtain .50 Cal. Rifles
BELLEVUE, Wash., Feb. 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) today condemned a sensational report on CNN that not only alerts potential terrorists on possible misuses of .50-caliber sporting rifles, but also literally provides a "road map" on how to obtain one of these cumbersome and very expensive firearms.
"In yet another media attempt to demonize a particular firearm, which CNN's own reporter, Drew Griffin, acknowledged has 'really never been used domestically in a criminal event,' this outrageous report still suggests to potential terrorists how such a gun might be put to criminal use," said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb.
CCRKBA executive director Joe Waldron agreed, noting, "The CNN report comes awfully close to being an attempt by a news organization to encourage an incident, just so CNN can later say 'We warned you'. This sort of journalism belongs right down there with the CBS debacle over the manufactured documents regarding allegations about President Bush (news - web sites)'s service in the Texas Air National Guard. With so-called 'news' like this on the nation's airwaves, it is no wonder that the American public no longer trusts the media, and believes the press has a political agenda."
The CNN report focused on what might happen to a commercial jet aircraft if a terrorist fired at it with a .50-caliber rifle.
"Essentially, CNN's Griffin and anchor Paula Zahn have literally told would-be terrorists, 'See what you might do with one of these firearms'?" Gottlieb observed. "Naturally, if such an incident occurs, CNN will quickly blame everyone but themselves. That's not simply disingenuous, it's despicable. Of course, CNN isn't the only news agency guilty of planting this seed of an idea in the mind of some lunatic. CBS' '60 Minutes' did the same thing, and they're all hoping to one day harvest a bumper crop of sensational stories about some airplane that comes under fire."
"If the press handed out awards for irresponsible journalism," Waldron suggested, "CNN would certainly be in the running. Their own report admits these clumsy recreational firearms have not been a problem. Not satisfied with that, it appears CNN isn't just reporting news, it's trying to invent news, and in this case, that news could have tragic consequences. That's Jayson Blair journalism at its worst. CNN ought to be ashamed, but it's doubtful they know the definition of that word."
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
Poor Poor Alabama
When I was in law school, I had a crazy professor named John Kramer. In the story below, the state of Alabama passed a law banning the sale of "sexual devices" which was being challenged in the Supreme Court as an invasion of privacy. There are many things I could say about this law, but I think a story about one of my law school professors says it all.
His name is John Kramer and he is possible now, certifiably insane. But a number of years ago, Mississippi tried to pass the same law banning the sale of sex aides. There was a town hall meeting in Mississippi where the law was being debated, so Professor Kramer decided to prove a point. Professor Kramer, who lives in New Orleans, drove to a local adult shop and bought the biggest dildo he could find... a two foot double-headed, think as your wrist dildo. He then drove across state lines and entered the town hall meeting, walked up to the front of the hall and produced the dildo from his bag... He then proceeded to whack the law's sponsor over the head with it and said, "See, I bought this is another state... I didn't buy it in Mississippi... But that didn't protect you, did it?... Your law can't stop this, now can it," and then walked out
Supreme Court Rejects Appeal on Ban on Sex Toy Sale
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Tuesday a constitutional challenge to an Alabama law that makes it a crime to sell sex toys.
The high court refused to hear an appeal by a group of individuals who regularly use sexual devices and by two vendors who argued the case raised important issues about the scope of the constitutional right to sexual privacy.
The law prohibited the distribution of "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs." First-time violators can face a fine of up to $10,000 and as much as one year in jail.
The law, adopted in 1998, allowed the sale of ordinary vibrators and body massagers that are not designed or marketed primarily as sexual aids. It exempted sales of sexual devices "for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, legislative, judicial or law enforcement purpose."
Georgia and Texas are the only other states that restrict the distribution of sexual devices, according to the court record in the case.
Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union, representing those who challenged the law, argued that private, consensual sexual conduct among adults is constitutionally protected and beyond the reach of government regulation.
They said the Supreme Court's decision in 2003 striking down a Texas sodomy law also created a fundamental, constitutional due process right to sexual privacy.
"The evidence shows that this case is not about novelty items, naughty toys or obscene matter. It is a case about human sexuality and extremely intimate acts," the attorneys said.
They said Alabama has never explained "why sales of performance enhancing drugs like Viagra, Cialis and Levitra and even ribbed condoms are not similarly prohibited."
The attorneys said the state did not contest the evidence that about 20 percent of all American women use a vibrator and at least 10 percent of sexually active adults use vibrators in their regular sex life.
A federal judge ruled against the state and found a constitutional right to use sexual devices. But a U.S. appeals court based in Atlanta upheld the law by a 2-1 vote.
(Full Story)
His name is John Kramer and he is possible now, certifiably insane. But a number of years ago, Mississippi tried to pass the same law banning the sale of sex aides. There was a town hall meeting in Mississippi where the law was being debated, so Professor Kramer decided to prove a point. Professor Kramer, who lives in New Orleans, drove to a local adult shop and bought the biggest dildo he could find... a two foot double-headed, think as your wrist dildo. He then drove across state lines and entered the town hall meeting, walked up to the front of the hall and produced the dildo from his bag... He then proceeded to whack the law's sponsor over the head with it and said, "See, I bought this is another state... I didn't buy it in Mississippi... But that didn't protect you, did it?... Your law can't stop this, now can it," and then walked out
Supreme Court Rejects Appeal on Ban on Sex Toy Sale
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Tuesday a constitutional challenge to an Alabama law that makes it a crime to sell sex toys.
The high court refused to hear an appeal by a group of individuals who regularly use sexual devices and by two vendors who argued the case raised important issues about the scope of the constitutional right to sexual privacy.
The law prohibited the distribution of "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs." First-time violators can face a fine of up to $10,000 and as much as one year in jail.
The law, adopted in 1998, allowed the sale of ordinary vibrators and body massagers that are not designed or marketed primarily as sexual aids. It exempted sales of sexual devices "for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, legislative, judicial or law enforcement purpose."
Georgia and Texas are the only other states that restrict the distribution of sexual devices, according to the court record in the case.
Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union, representing those who challenged the law, argued that private, consensual sexual conduct among adults is constitutionally protected and beyond the reach of government regulation.
They said the Supreme Court's decision in 2003 striking down a Texas sodomy law also created a fundamental, constitutional due process right to sexual privacy.
"The evidence shows that this case is not about novelty items, naughty toys or obscene matter. It is a case about human sexuality and extremely intimate acts," the attorneys said.
They said Alabama has never explained "why sales of performance enhancing drugs like Viagra, Cialis and Levitra and even ribbed condoms are not similarly prohibited."
The attorneys said the state did not contest the evidence that about 20 percent of all American women use a vibrator and at least 10 percent of sexually active adults use vibrators in their regular sex life.
A federal judge ruled against the state and found a constitutional right to use sexual devices. But a U.S. appeals court based in Atlanta upheld the law by a 2-1 vote.
(Full Story)
Eminent Domain
Eminent domain... I am sure we have all heard the rash of stories about how local municipalities are condemning private homes in order to make way for new private economic development. Whether it be shopping malls or condos, the rationale for seizure of private property for private economic development is valid. It draws new business, raises property taxes and revenue which pays for schools, police, fire departments. And, it is usually only a small portion of the community that pays the price for the benefit of everyone else overall. How else can a local municipality revitalize towns falling into slow economic ruin.
But, is this what America is really about. It is one of our most cherished values - the right to own our own land without unreasonable interference. And the Americans who bear the brunt of this growing trend is usually hard working lower middle class and lower class citizens. First, the government paved over their houses with freeways. That, at least, was truly public use. Now, we are trying to take their homes so someone else can make money. This, even with the economic benefits it brings the rest of the community is somehow just plain wrong and has gone too far. Where will this end? And is anyone safe? A man's home is his castle and should be treated as such.
Court to Hear Battle Over Eminent Domain
By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Residents trying to hang onto their homes in a working class neighborhood of New London, Conn., are waging a battle in the Supreme Court over their city government's attempt to seize property for private economic development.
Susette Kelo and several other homeowners filed a lawsuit after city officials announced plans to bulldoze their residences to clear the way for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices. The residents refused to move, arguing it was an unconstitutional taking of their property.
The case's outcome will have significant implications for so-called eminent domain actions.
There have been over 10,000 instances in recent years of private property being threatened with condemnation or actually condemned by government for private use, according to the Institute for Justice. The group represents the New London residents who filed the case.
The issue revolves around whether a government is serving a public purpose when it uses its power of eminent domain to take land. The Fifth Amendment prohibits taking private property for public use without just compensation. The New London case is not about the amount of compensation being offered, but whether the government can take the property at all.
Over the years, the Supreme Court has deferred to the decision-making of elected state and local officials.
The court said in 1954 that it is legal for urban renewal to encompass non-blighted commercial buildings in a blighted neighborhood. In 1984, the court upheld Hawaii's land reform law that broke the grip of large landowners, with property being taken and then resold to others.
More recently, many cities and towns have been accused of abusing their authority, razing nice homes to make way for parking lots for casinos and other tax-producing businesses.
(Full Story)
But, is this what America is really about. It is one of our most cherished values - the right to own our own land without unreasonable interference. And the Americans who bear the brunt of this growing trend is usually hard working lower middle class and lower class citizens. First, the government paved over their houses with freeways. That, at least, was truly public use. Now, we are trying to take their homes so someone else can make money. This, even with the economic benefits it brings the rest of the community is somehow just plain wrong and has gone too far. Where will this end? And is anyone safe? A man's home is his castle and should be treated as such.
Court to Hear Battle Over Eminent Domain
By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Residents trying to hang onto their homes in a working class neighborhood of New London, Conn., are waging a battle in the Supreme Court over their city government's attempt to seize property for private economic development.
Susette Kelo and several other homeowners filed a lawsuit after city officials announced plans to bulldoze their residences to clear the way for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices. The residents refused to move, arguing it was an unconstitutional taking of their property.
The case's outcome will have significant implications for so-called eminent domain actions.
There have been over 10,000 instances in recent years of private property being threatened with condemnation or actually condemned by government for private use, according to the Institute for Justice. The group represents the New London residents who filed the case.
The issue revolves around whether a government is serving a public purpose when it uses its power of eminent domain to take land. The Fifth Amendment prohibits taking private property for public use without just compensation. The New London case is not about the amount of compensation being offered, but whether the government can take the property at all.
Over the years, the Supreme Court has deferred to the decision-making of elected state and local officials.
The court said in 1954 that it is legal for urban renewal to encompass non-blighted commercial buildings in a blighted neighborhood. In 1984, the court upheld Hawaii's land reform law that broke the grip of large landowners, with property being taken and then resold to others.
More recently, many cities and towns have been accused of abusing their authority, razing nice homes to make way for parking lots for casinos and other tax-producing businesses.
(Full Story)
In Memoriam
Iconoclast... Yup. Drug abuser... Uh-huh. A little bit off kilter... Without a doubt.
One hell of a writer... You betcha!
Thompson Death Marks End of Literary Era
If you have never read it, check out "Fear and Loathing on the Campeign Trail '72"
One hell of a writer... You betcha!
Thompson Death Marks End of Literary Era
If you have never read it, check out "Fear and Loathing on the Campeign Trail '72"
Saturday, February 19, 2005
I Knew Ther was a Good Reason Not to Follow NASCAR
This is not a knock on NASCAR, or even on the vast majority of devoted NASCAR fans out there. NASCAR is not my kind of gig (give me Hockey any day... sniff) but I know that it has a huge following in the US, so it must have redeeming qualities to a lot of people. But this action by the neo-Nazi National Alliance to target NASCAR events to spread their message should give all Americans something to think about. There is obviously a reason they are targeting these events and not the ballets or operas. You must ask, what is the environment that attracts the neo-Nazi National Alliance to these events? Why are these fans more susceptible to their message? And, if you are a NASCAR fan, what can you do to ensure the neo-Nazi National Alliance cannot exploit NASCAR for their own benefit? If I were a NASCAR fan I would be absolutely livid that such a vial group would target me as being neo-Nazi material.
White Supremacists Target NASCAR's Daytona 500 Race for Major Recruitment Drive
To: National Desk
Contact: Mark Medin, 954-478-3240, Monika Koplow, 954-938-8188, both of the Anti-Defamation League
FT. LAUDERDALE, Fla., Feb. 18 /U.S. Newswire/ -- One of the country's largest and most virulent anti-Semitic and racist hate groups plans to undertake a major recruitment drive at the Daytona International Speedway during NASCAR's Daytona 500 Race on Sunday, February 20.
Among other claims, the neo-Nazi National Alliance (N.A.) says it has arranged for an airplane to fly over the racetrack with a banner that reads, "Love Your Race" and promoting the group's Web site. Members of the group also plan on handing out fliers in the parking lot near the nationally televised event.
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which monitors extremist groups, has notified local and state law enforcement authorities of the planned recruitment effort, and is warning the public to beware the group's hateful agenda.
"Our concern is that people will think that the National Alliance is some kind of mainstream group, when in fact they are a dangerous extremist group," said Mark Medin, ADL Florida Regional Director. "The National Alliance clearly sees this high-profile gathering of NASCAR fans as a prime opportunity to spread their message of hate, or possibly to recruit new members."
According to postings by National Alliance members on the Internet, the Tampa unit, led by Todd Weingart, is coordinating the recruitment drive. The group's national leadership in West Virginia has indicated their support.
This is not the first time the group has targeted a NASCAR event. In November 2003, four members of the National Alliance reportedly handed out racist fliers, cards and tape recordings of their broadcasts at the NASCAR Winston Cup Race in North Carolina. At the time, the group said it was trying to exploit tensions around efforts by African-Americans to diversify the sport of car racing.
One of the largest and most active neo-Nazi organizations in the U.S., the N.A. has four chapters in Florida: Orlando, Tampa, Palm Beach and Gainesville. The group has recently spread racist and anti-Semitic literature in Ft. Myers, Davie and St. Petersburg, and has rented billboard space on the Florida Turnpike near Orlando.
In the last decade, the N.A. has enjoyed significant growth and has recently focused most of its attention on recruiting young racists. At the same time, the N.A. has tried to attract middle-class professionals willing to be part of a dedicated cadre that carries out the group's goals. Over the last several years, dozens of violent crimes, including murders, bombings and robberies have been traced to N.A. members or appear to have been inspired by the group's propaganda.
White Supremacists Target NASCAR's Daytona 500 Race for Major Recruitment Drive
To: National Desk
Contact: Mark Medin, 954-478-3240, Monika Koplow, 954-938-8188, both of the Anti-Defamation League
FT. LAUDERDALE, Fla., Feb. 18 /U.S. Newswire/ -- One of the country's largest and most virulent anti-Semitic and racist hate groups plans to undertake a major recruitment drive at the Daytona International Speedway during NASCAR's Daytona 500 Race on Sunday, February 20.
Among other claims, the neo-Nazi National Alliance (N.A.) says it has arranged for an airplane to fly over the racetrack with a banner that reads, "Love Your Race" and promoting the group's Web site. Members of the group also plan on handing out fliers in the parking lot near the nationally televised event.
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which monitors extremist groups, has notified local and state law enforcement authorities of the planned recruitment effort, and is warning the public to beware the group's hateful agenda.
"Our concern is that people will think that the National Alliance is some kind of mainstream group, when in fact they are a dangerous extremist group," said Mark Medin, ADL Florida Regional Director. "The National Alliance clearly sees this high-profile gathering of NASCAR fans as a prime opportunity to spread their message of hate, or possibly to recruit new members."
According to postings by National Alliance members on the Internet, the Tampa unit, led by Todd Weingart, is coordinating the recruitment drive. The group's national leadership in West Virginia has indicated their support.
This is not the first time the group has targeted a NASCAR event. In November 2003, four members of the National Alliance reportedly handed out racist fliers, cards and tape recordings of their broadcasts at the NASCAR Winston Cup Race in North Carolina. At the time, the group said it was trying to exploit tensions around efforts by African-Americans to diversify the sport of car racing.
One of the largest and most active neo-Nazi organizations in the U.S., the N.A. has four chapters in Florida: Orlando, Tampa, Palm Beach and Gainesville. The group has recently spread racist and anti-Semitic literature in Ft. Myers, Davie and St. Petersburg, and has rented billboard space on the Florida Turnpike near Orlando.
In the last decade, the N.A. has enjoyed significant growth and has recently focused most of its attention on recruiting young racists. At the same time, the N.A. has tried to attract middle-class professionals willing to be part of a dedicated cadre that carries out the group's goals. Over the last several years, dozens of violent crimes, including murders, bombings and robberies have been traced to N.A. members or appear to have been inspired by the group's propaganda.
Friday, February 18, 2005
Terror Threat Politics
Even though Tom Ridge adamantly portrayed himself above the fray of politics in his job, it has come to light that he was secretly meeting with Republican pollsters prior to the election. Remember how the terror threat would go up every time the Democrats made any headway in the campaign?... Then the Democrats accused Tom Ridge of playing politics with the threat of terrorism? Well, it looks like they may have not have been so far off base after all.
Ridge, Pollsters Met During Bush Campaign
By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge met privately with Republican pollsters twice in a 10-day span last spring as he embarked on more than a dozen trips to presidential battleground states.
Ridge's get-togethers with Republican strategists Frank Luntz and Bill McInturff during a period the secretary was saying his agency was playing no role in Bush's re-election campaign were revealed in daily appointment calendars obtained by The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act.
"We don't do politics in the Department of Homeland Security," Ridge told reporters during the election season.
His aides resisted releasing the calendars for over a year, finally providing them to the AP three days after Ridge left office this month.
Homeland Security officials said the meeting with Luntz at department headquarters was aimed at improving public communication of the department's message, particularly on TV. Ridge declined an interview with the AP about the calendars, referring questions to former aides.
(Full Story)
Ridge, Pollsters Met During Bush Campaign
By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge met privately with Republican pollsters twice in a 10-day span last spring as he embarked on more than a dozen trips to presidential battleground states.
Ridge's get-togethers with Republican strategists Frank Luntz and Bill McInturff during a period the secretary was saying his agency was playing no role in Bush's re-election campaign were revealed in daily appointment calendars obtained by The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act.
"We don't do politics in the Department of Homeland Security," Ridge told reporters during the election season.
His aides resisted releasing the calendars for over a year, finally providing them to the AP three days after Ridge left office this month.
Homeland Security officials said the meeting with Luntz at department headquarters was aimed at improving public communication of the department's message, particularly on TV. Ridge declined an interview with the AP about the calendars, referring questions to former aides.
(Full Story)
Bush Sends Class Action To Federal Court
I am not sure how much effect that this bill will have on class action law suits in actuality. It will stop plaintiff lawyers from forum shopping (finding the most sympathetic court to hear the case), which I don't think is a particularly bad idea. But, it will essentially now allow the defense attorneys to do the same thing (forum shop) in federal court so they can find the most sympathetic court to try the case. This can have disastrous effect on consumer protection. Only time will tell whether this will make the American people less safe from dangerous products. In the end, I don't see much changing.
Bush Signs Bill Curbing Class-Action Suits
By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - President Bush on Friday signed a bill that he says will curtail multimillion-dollar class action lawsuits against companies and "marks a critical step toward ending the lawsuit culture in our country."
The legislation aims to discourage multimillion-dollar class-action lawsuits by having federal judges take them away from state courts, a victory for conservatives who hope it will lead to other lawsuit limits. The president has described class-action suits as often frivolous, and businesses complain that state judges and juries have been too generous to plaintiffs.
"This bill helps fix the system," Bush said in the East Room of the White House, his first bill signing ceremony this year. "Congress has done it's duty."
But during the brief ceremony, Bush repeatedly described the bill as just a beginning in his drive to place much broader restraints on the American legal system.
"We're making important progress toward a better legal system," he said. "There's more to do. ... We have a responsibility to confront frivolous lawsuits head-on."
Under the legislation, class-action suits seeking $5 million or more would be heard in state court only if the primary defendant and more than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state. But if fewer than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state as the primary defendant, and more than $5 million is at stake, the case would go to federal court.
Consumer groups and trial lawyers fought against the bill, but lost their struggle when Republicans gained seats in last fall's elections and Democrats defected on the issue.
"The House of Representatives joined the Senate in sending a clear message to the nation: the rights of large corporations that take advantage of seniors, low-wage workers and local communities are more important than the rights of average American citizens," said Helen Gonzales of USAction, a liberal, pro-consumer activist group.
Bush Signs Bill Curbing Class-Action Suits
By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - President Bush on Friday signed a bill that he says will curtail multimillion-dollar class action lawsuits against companies and "marks a critical step toward ending the lawsuit culture in our country."
The legislation aims to discourage multimillion-dollar class-action lawsuits by having federal judges take them away from state courts, a victory for conservatives who hope it will lead to other lawsuit limits. The president has described class-action suits as often frivolous, and businesses complain that state judges and juries have been too generous to plaintiffs.
"This bill helps fix the system," Bush said in the East Room of the White House, his first bill signing ceremony this year. "Congress has done it's duty."
But during the brief ceremony, Bush repeatedly described the bill as just a beginning in his drive to place much broader restraints on the American legal system.
"We're making important progress toward a better legal system," he said. "There's more to do. ... We have a responsibility to confront frivolous lawsuits head-on."
Under the legislation, class-action suits seeking $5 million or more would be heard in state court only if the primary defendant and more than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state. But if fewer than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state as the primary defendant, and more than $5 million is at stake, the case would go to federal court.
Consumer groups and trial lawyers fought against the bill, but lost their struggle when Republicans gained seats in last fall's elections and Democrats defected on the issue.
"The House of Representatives joined the Senate in sending a clear message to the nation: the rights of large corporations that take advantage of seniors, low-wage workers and local communities are more important than the rights of average American citizens," said Helen Gonzales of USAction, a liberal, pro-consumer activist group.
Monday, February 14, 2005
Pass the Buck President
There is little argument these days (even from staunch conservatives) that Bush is the least personally accountable presidents in the last 100 years. Now, he is also turning into "pass the buck Bush." Many of Bush's policy provisions balloon in cost shortly after he leaves office, leaving the next president (whoever that may be) with huge budget problems.
After Bush Leaves Office, His Budget's Costs Balloon
By Jonathan Weisman and Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, February 14, 2005; Page A01
For President Bush, the budget sent to Congress last week outlines a painful path to meeting his promise to bring down the federal budget deficit by the time he leaves office in 2009. But for the senators and governors already jockeying to succeed him, the numbers released in recent days add up to a budgetary landmine that could blow up just as the next president moves into the Oval Office.
Congress and the White House have become adept at passing legislation with hidden long-term price tags, but those huge costs began coming into view in Bush's latest spending plan. Even if Bush succeeds in slashing the deficit in half in four years, as he has pledged, his major policy prescriptions would leave his successor with massive financial commitments that begin rising dramatically the year he relinquishes the White House, according to an analysis of new budget figures.
(Full Story)
After Bush Leaves Office, His Budget's Costs Balloon
By Jonathan Weisman and Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, February 14, 2005; Page A01
For President Bush, the budget sent to Congress last week outlines a painful path to meeting his promise to bring down the federal budget deficit by the time he leaves office in 2009. But for the senators and governors already jockeying to succeed him, the numbers released in recent days add up to a budgetary landmine that could blow up just as the next president moves into the Oval Office.
Congress and the White House have become adept at passing legislation with hidden long-term price tags, but those huge costs began coming into view in Bush's latest spending plan. Even if Bush succeeds in slashing the deficit in half in four years, as he has pledged, his major policy prescriptions would leave his successor with massive financial commitments that begin rising dramatically the year he relinquishes the White House, according to an analysis of new budget figures.
(Full Story)
Evangelical Divide
This is a good article about the growing divide in evangelical Christians about what and how faith should play in politics. It has some quotes from Jim Wallis, the author of "God's Politics" which I recommend for everyone to read.
Moderate evangelicals preach their own politics
By Stevenson Swanson
Tribune national correspondent
Published February 14, 2005
NEW YORK -- When it comes to politics, evangelical Christians don't all sing from the same choir book.
Abortion, same-sex marriage and stem cell research may be the issues most commonly associated with evangelical voters, but moderate and liberal evangelicals are mounting an effort to make their voices heard on subjects not normally associated with their movement, including poverty, the war in Iraq and the environment.
White evangelical Protestants voted overwhelmingly for President Bush last year, but, illustrating the broader spectrum of thought within the group, 76 leaders of evangelical colleges, seminaries and ministries recently asked him to do something about what they called the nation's "unacceptably high" rates of hunger and poverty and the high numbers of Americans who lack health insurance.
"I think it's really important to break up the old stereotypes," said Rev. Jim Wallis, an evangelical whose new book, "God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It," has drawn attention to evangelicals' political diversity. "There is a progressive religious option, and that is encouraging to people of faith who are tired of the control of this issue by the right."
Although precise definitions vary, the estimated 55 million evangelicals in America generally believe the Bible is infallible and that a transforming experience, or being "born again," is required for a person to be saved.
Wallis, for example, uses the Bible to back his contention that evangelicals should be more concerned about the poor. The Bible, he says, contains 3,000 verses that mention the poor.
"How did the faith of Jesus come to be known as pro-rich, pro-war, and only pro-American?" he writes in "God's Politics."
Among other initiatives in the evangelical community, Call to Renewal, the anti-poverty advocacy group that Wallis heads, is working with other religious groups on the issue of achieving a "living wage" for low-income workers through increases in the minimum wage and the earned-income tax credit.
For the sake of political influence, Wallis and others argue that the evangelical vote should not be taken for granted. That means, they say, that Republicans should not assume evangelicals automatically will vote for them and that Democrats should not give up attempts to make inroads among less-conservative religious voters.
Statistically, that's a hard argument to support. Evangelicals, who make up a quarter of the adult population, favored Bush by 78 percent to 22 percent for Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry, according to an analysis of election results by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. That's up from Bush's 71 percent among evangelicals in 2000.
(Full Story)
Moderate evangelicals preach their own politics
By Stevenson Swanson
Tribune national correspondent
Published February 14, 2005
NEW YORK -- When it comes to politics, evangelical Christians don't all sing from the same choir book.
Abortion, same-sex marriage and stem cell research may be the issues most commonly associated with evangelical voters, but moderate and liberal evangelicals are mounting an effort to make their voices heard on subjects not normally associated with their movement, including poverty, the war in Iraq and the environment.
White evangelical Protestants voted overwhelmingly for President Bush last year, but, illustrating the broader spectrum of thought within the group, 76 leaders of evangelical colleges, seminaries and ministries recently asked him to do something about what they called the nation's "unacceptably high" rates of hunger and poverty and the high numbers of Americans who lack health insurance.
"I think it's really important to break up the old stereotypes," said Rev. Jim Wallis, an evangelical whose new book, "God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It," has drawn attention to evangelicals' political diversity. "There is a progressive religious option, and that is encouraging to people of faith who are tired of the control of this issue by the right."
Although precise definitions vary, the estimated 55 million evangelicals in America generally believe the Bible is infallible and that a transforming experience, or being "born again," is required for a person to be saved.
Wallis, for example, uses the Bible to back his contention that evangelicals should be more concerned about the poor. The Bible, he says, contains 3,000 verses that mention the poor.
"How did the faith of Jesus come to be known as pro-rich, pro-war, and only pro-American?" he writes in "God's Politics."
Among other initiatives in the evangelical community, Call to Renewal, the anti-poverty advocacy group that Wallis heads, is working with other religious groups on the issue of achieving a "living wage" for low-income workers through increases in the minimum wage and the earned-income tax credit.
For the sake of political influence, Wallis and others argue that the evangelical vote should not be taken for granted. That means, they say, that Republicans should not assume evangelicals automatically will vote for them and that Democrats should not give up attempts to make inroads among less-conservative religious voters.
Statistically, that's a hard argument to support. Evangelicals, who make up a quarter of the adult population, favored Bush by 78 percent to 22 percent for Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry, according to an analysis of election results by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. That's up from Bush's 71 percent among evangelicals in 2000.
(Full Story)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
