For Dems only.

[Rex Kickass]

Welcome to the dark side.

[NorthSideSox72]

What do you guys think about Jim Webb? I thought he did a good job on Meet The Press

So, I've done a little reading now on Mr. Webb. I think I like him. His statements from a few decades ago about women in the military are a little disturbing, though he has apologized for them. Other than that, I like what I see.

[Balta1701]

Supposedly this comes directly from the Congressional record.

 

Mr. Durbin: Will the Senator yield for a question?

 

Mr. Reid: I will be happy to yield for a question.

 

Mr. Durbin: Can the Senator refresh my memory? Was Mr. Bremmer the recipient of a gold medal or something from the President? Didn't he receive some high decoration or medal for his performance in Iraq?

 

Mr. Reid: The answer is, yes, he received that. I assume one would expect that from somebody who had a throne while he was over there.

 

Mr. Durbin: Isn't it also true that George Tenet, who was responsible for the intelligence that was so bad that led us into the war in Iraq, got a medal from the President the same day?

 

Mr. Reid: That is true.

 

Mr. Durbin: Did Michael Brown with FEMA receive a gold medal from the White House before he was dismissed?

 

Mr. Reid: I don't think he did. Even though he was doing a heck of a job, I don't think he obtained a medal from the White House.

 

Mr. Durbin: Apparently, these gold medals were being awarded for incompetence. They missed Mr. Brown, but they did give one to Mr. Bremmer. Will the Senator yield for another question?

 

Mr. Reid: I will be happy to.

 

Mr. Durbin: I am trying to recall the exact number -- it was in the billions of dollars -- that we gave to the President for the reconstruction of Iraq; is that not true?

 

Mr. Reid: It started out at $18 billion. But as the Senator from Illinois will remember, part of that money, stacks of one-hundred-dollar bills, was used by some of the contractors who were sent over there to play football games -- some of these same people.

 

Mr. Durbin: It is also true, is it not, that the Democratic policy conference has been holding hearings -- in fact, I think it is the only agency on the Hill holding hearings -- on this waste and abuse, this profiteering and corruption at the expense of American taxpayers and even, equally important -- more importantly -- at the expense of our troops?

 

Mr. Reid: I say to my friend, this war is approaching 3 1/2 years, and there has not been a single congressional oversight hearing on the conduct of the war. This war has now cost us, the American taxpayers, about $325 billion. There has not been a single congressional oversight hearing on the war.

 

Mr. Durbin: I ask the Senator from Nevada if he might comment on this as well: Are we not in a situation where the President has told us that he wants to "stay the course'' in Iraq, and Vice President Cheney, when asked a week ago, said he wouldn't change a thing in the way they have done this war in Iraq? Is it very clear that unless there is a change in leadership in this town soon, we are going to continue down this disastrous course, exposing our soldiers to danger every single day, their families to the anxiety of separation, and the taxpayers of this country to billions and billions of dollars more being spent that don't make us any safer?

 

Mr. Reid: I say to my friend, I spent the weekend reading a book. I did other things. I spent a lot of time on an airplane. The book is called "Fiasco,'' written by a man named Thomas Ricks who has spent his life covering the military. He has written books on the military. I don't know his political persuasion. This book is on the best seller's list of the New York Times.

 

In this book, he talks in such detail about what has happened as a result of the incompetence of this administration to our valiant fighting men and women over there. I recommend the book to anyone. It is a searing indictment of this administration.

[Balta1701]

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a non-partisan group, has once again released its list of the top 20 most corrupt members of Congress (and they added 5 more people to watch for next year). Here is this year's list.

 

CREW’s Most Corrupt Members of Congress:

Members of the Senate:

Conrad Burns (R-MT)

Bill Frist (R-TN)

Rick Santorum (R-PA)

 

Members of the House:

Alan Mollohan (D-WV)

Roy Blunt (R-MO)

Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO)

Ken Calvert (R-CA)

Richard Pombo (R-CA)

John Doolittle (R-CA)

Rick Renzi (R-AZ)

Tom Feeney (R-FL)

Pete Sessions (R-TX)

Katherine Harris (R-FL)

John Sweeney (R-NY)

William Jefferson (D-LA)

Charles Taylor (R-NC)

Jerry Lewis (R-CA)

Maxine Waters (D-CA)

Gary Miller (R-CA)

Curt Weldon (R-PA)

 

Five Members to Watch:

Chris Cannon (R-UT)

J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ)

Dennis Hastert (R-IL)

John Murtha (D-PA)

Don Sherwood (R-PA)

A full summary of why each member made their list can be found at http://beyonddelay.org/

[NorthSideSox72]

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a non-partisan group, has once again released its list of the top 20 most corrupt members of Congress (and they added 5 more people to watch for next year). Here is this year's list.

 

A full summary of why each member made their list can be found at http://beyonddelay.org/

Tell me if I am mistaken, but aren't 2 of those three senators looking like they will lose their next elections, based on current polls?

 

And I have to say I'm a bit surprised at Hastert being in there. He has always seemed to me to be a straight arrow. I'll have to read up on their reasoning there.

[Soxy]

And I have to say I'm a bit surprised at Hastert being in there. He has always seemed to me to be a straight arrow. I'll have to read up on their reasoning there.

Iirc, there was a very recent scandal ( I didn't follow it closely), I feel like it involved a land deal in Kendall County, but I could be mistaken. My dad talked about it for a while, but my dad is often wrong about politics, so. . .

 

Coming from O-town (Denny and my Aunt when to high school together, the Hasterts also used to attend the same church I did), I can't say I'm totally surprised.

[Balta1701]

Tell me if I am mistaken, but aren't 2 of those three senators looking like they will lose their next elections, based on current polls?

 

And I have to say I'm a bit surprised at Hastert being in there. He has always seemed to me to be a straight arrow. I'll have to read up on their reasoning there.

No, you are not mistaken. And the same things that have landed them on this list are a big part of the reasons why they are losing in their races. Which means they'll be replaced by someone else next year.

 

Hastert's going to be in there because of that land deal that made him a ton of money when he was able to pass legislation that made land he owned far more valuable.

[Soxy]

So I just saw a funny bumpersticker:

Bush/Cheney

1984

War is Peace

[Balta1701]

BLITZER: Let's move on and talk a little bit about Iraq. Because this is a huge, huge issue, as you know, for the American public, a lot of concern that perhaps they are on the verge of a civil war, if not already a civil war…. We see these horrible bodies showing up, tortured, mutilation. The Shia and the Sunni, the Iranians apparently having a negative role. Of course, al Qaeda in Iraq is still operating.

 

BUSH: Yes, you see — you see it on TV, and that's the power of an enemy that is willing to kill innocent people. But there's also an unbelievable will and resiliency by the Iraqi people…. Admittedly, it seems like a decade ago. I like to tell people when the final history is written on Iraq, it will look like just a comma because there is — my point is, there's a strong will for democracy. (emphasis mine)

[Balta1701]

So, back in April, the government completed a "National Intelligence Estimate" which it began in 2004 looking at the status of global terrorism. This estimate is a summation of reports from 16 different intelligence gathering agencies. Basically it's the opinion of the entire U.S. government's information gathering apparatus. According to the NYT, which has about a dozen sources on the contents of this document, here is what it says.

 

A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

 

The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document.

 

The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,’’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.

 

An opening section of the report, “Indicators of the Spread of the Global Jihadist Movement,” cites the Iraq war as a reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology.

 

The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official.

 

More than a dozen United States government officials and outside experts were interviewed for this article, and all spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were discussing a classified intelligence document. The officials included employees of several government agencies, and both supporters and critics of the Bush administration. All of those interviewed had either seen the final version of the document or participated in the creation of earlier drafts. These officials discussed some of the document’s general conclusions but not details, which remain highly classified.

 

Officials with knowledge of the intelligence estimate said it avoided specific judgments about the likelihood that terrorists would once again strike on United States soil. The relationship between the Iraq war and terrorism, and the question of whether the United States is safer, have been subjects of persistent debate since the war began in 2003.

 

National Intelligence Estimates are the most authoritative documents that the intelligence community produces on a specific national security issue, and are approved by John D. Negroponte, director of national intelligence. Their conclusions are based on analysis of raw intelligence collected by all of the spy agencies.

 

Analysts began working on the estimate in 2004, but it was not finalized until this year. Part of the reason was that some government officials were unhappy with the structure and focus of earlier versions of the document, according to officials involved in the discussion.

 

Previous drafts described actions by the United States government that were determined to have stoked the jihad movement, like the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay and the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, and some policy makers argued that the intelligence estimate should be more focused on specific steps to mitigate the terror threat. It is unclear whether the final draft of the intelligence estimate criticizes individual policies of the United States, but intelligence officials involved in preparing the document said its conclusions were not softened or massaged for political purposes.

[Balta1701]

Enough said.

[Soxy]

And THIS is exactly what's wrong with the Republican party.

 

 

"I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate," Falwell said at a breakfast session Friday in Washington. "I hope she's the candidate, because nothing will energize my (constituency) like

Hillary Clinton," he said. "If Lucifer ran, he wouldn't."

[southsider2k5]

And THIS is exactly what's wrong with the Republican party.

"I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate," Falwell said at a breakfast session Friday in Washington. "I hope she's the candidate, because nothing will energize my (constituency) like

Hillary Clinton," he said. "If Lucifer ran, he wouldn't."

 

The funny thing is that its sad, but true. See also Dems to GWB....

[Soxy]

The funny thing is that its sad, but true. See also Dems to GWB....

I think the worst part, for me, is that here you have this "Reverend/Man of God" talking about how he would get people more riled up for Hillary than The Prince of Darkness. Come on, don't say that stuff if you're a pastor.

[southsider2k5]

I think the worst part, for me, is that here you have this "Reverend/Man of God" talking about how he would get people more riled up for Hillary than The Prince of Darkness. Come on, don't say that stuff if you're a pastor.

 

The really sad thing is that I expect nothing more of him. I think if my pastor started talking about who I should vote for, and who is the canditate of God, I would never listen go back. His job is to teach the word of God. How I understand it is an issue for me, God, and the Holy Spirit to decide.... But thanks for all of the help

[Balta1701]

The really sad thing is that I expect nothing more of him. I think if my pastor started talking about who I should vote for, and who is the canditate of God, I would never listen go back. His job is to teach the word of God. How I understand it is an issue for me, God, and the Holy Spirit to decide.... But thanks for all of the help

Actually, I for one think the really sad thing is that while he gets to go off and do that...there's a pastor right here in Pasadena who's under investigation by the IRS for a sermon he gave opposed to the Iraq war in 2004.

[Balta1701]

We're up to $2 billion a week!

[Gene Honda Civic]

http://www.gawker.com/news/cnn/more-libera...bias-205000.php

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

All I can say after the events of the last couple of days is if you guys dont take control of at least the House next month you need to blow up your party and start over. This is the most incredible confluence of events to favor one party since the Depression.

[mr_genius]

We're up to $2 billion a week!

 

 

i know, the whole thing has been a huge waste of money.

[Balta1701]

[FlaSoxxJim]

Edited October 5, 2006 by FlaSoxxJim

[Texsox]

Hi,

 

I have to tell you something.

 

In the last few days, we've had an explosive response to our push for a full 50-State Turnout operation.

 

Why? Because the latest Republican scandal proves that our mission of fighting everywhere has been right from the beginning.

 

Long before Republican Congressman Mark Foley resigned in disgrace last week, we already had thousands of supporters on the ground in his district -- and a solid Democratic candidate ready to take him on. We didn't have to hurry up to catch up to an unexpected opportunity that arose -- we were already there, working to win.

 

It's just one of hundreds of districts where our 50-state strategy has made a difference.

 

Your Democratic Party is fighting in every single state and every single community across America -- all part of a 50-State Turnout operation unlike anything our party has seen in a generation.

 

Will you make a donation to support Democrats everywhere?

 

http://www.democrats.org/fighteverywhere

 

Democrats are fighting in important races up and down the ballot on the idea that the culture of corruption and cover-up just won't stand up against a message of real change.

 

Our 50-state strategy has transformed into a 50-State Turnout operation based on the idea that every voter counts -- even in Republican strongholds.

 

For every Republican brought down by scandal there are far more who will be brought down by Democrats standing up for what we believe and reaching out to every voter possible.

 

Please donate now to support the Democratic cause:

 

http://www.democrats.org/fighteverywhere

 

We're ready to lead.

 

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

Chairman

Democratic National Committee

 

P.S. -- If you want to be part of the 50-State Turnout operation in your area, you can find all the information you need here:

 

http://www.democrats.org/50stateturnout

[Balta1701]

The amazing thing about this 50 state strategy of Dean's is that idiots like Mark Foley are exactly why you want that to exist.

 

If you just target all of your resources on the most competitive districts, and barely even notice 50 or 100 other districts, don't even field candidates in some of them, and have absolutely no ground preparation at all...if something were to blow up, like the downfall of one of the top Republicans in the House, suddenly you'd be caught wishing that you had actually run people and recruited campaign workers in those safe Republican districts.

 

Now, every single Democrat in the country can run ads saying that their opponent supported Tom Delay, who resigned from Congress under indictment, and Dennis Hastert, who failed to investigate a potential child abuser...and it's hard to imagine a more devastating set of ads.

[Rex Kickass]

No party has ever had a candidate running in all 435 Congressional districts. However, this year I believe the Dems are running a candidate in all but 9 spots.