For Dems only.

[Balta1701]

EM didn't refer to a specific party. I assumed he meant both.

Certainly not how I read it, he was replying to a post that specifically mentionned Dems trying to improve the situation, and said that "They need to shut their mouths", so I figured he was targeting specifically the Democrats. Anywho, if I'm wrong I'm wrong, but that's how I read it.

[NorthSideSox72]

Certainly not how I read it, he was replying to a post that specifically mentionned Dems trying to improve the situation, and said that "They need to shut their mouths", so I figured he was targeting specifically the Democrats. Anywho, if I'm wrong I'm wrong, but that's how I read it.

Plenty of venom coming from both parties in Congress. And although Reid has irritated me thus far, I do give a lot of credit to the Dems in general for apparently extending the first few olive branches.

[southsider2k5]

I always new Rick Santorum was a Democrat.

 

Yeah for two wrongs making a right!

[Balta1701]

Yeah for two wrongs making a right!

Doesn't make it right from either side, but blaming only 1 side (which is how I read that remark) for something done by both should elicit quite a few screams.

[EvilMonkey]

Doesn't make it right from either side, but blaming only 1 side (which is how I read that remark) for something done by both should elicit quite a few screams.

Oh ye, Master of the Google search, dare to look up how many times Georgie and/or republicans in general have been referred to as Hitler or Hitleresque in the last few years. I will bet that it far outnumbers however many times Santorum chooses to make an ass out of himself. However, as like Northside said, i will give them credit for at least publicly extending an olive branch. not only blaming one side, but I will say that one side has a distinct tendency to use that phrase, and it is not the Republicans.

[Balta1701]

This one should rocket right up to the top of the list of stupidest things we've heard in the past 6 years. link.

CNN White House correspondent Ed Henry: You know, going back to September 2001, the president said, dead or alive, we're going to get him. Still don't have him. I know you are saying there's successes on the war on terror, and there have been. That's a failure.

 

Frances Fragos Townsend, assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism: Well, I'm not sure -- it's a success that hasn't occurred yet. I don't know that I view that as a failure.

It burns...it burns....

[FlaSoxxJim]

Oh ye, Master of the Google search, dare to look up how many times Georgie and/or republicans in general have been referred to as Hitler or Hitleresque in the last few years. I will bet that it far outnumbers however many times Santorum chooses to make an ass out of himself.

 

But it does not far outnumber the times non-Republicans are referred to as 'Hitler', 'worse than Hitler', 'Nazis', etc. The fact that Godwin's Law was enunciated a decade before GWB took office, and the fact that Leo Strauss poked fun at the false logic of the reductio ad Hitlerum back in the 1950s demonstrates that hyperbolic Hitler comparisons have been around for generations. for every 'Bush = Hitler' or 'Rummy = Hitler' you can find, I can find some equally stupid non-conservative = Hitler reference.

 

Here's a funny blog entry that includes a bunch of good ones, including George Soros = Hitler, Martha Stewart = Hitler, Howard Dean = Hitler, and lots of others that peg both teh left and the right as the new face of the Nazi party.

 

To be sure, there's lots of Bush = Hitler comparisons out there, as this site tried to compile back in 2005.

 

Heil Hyperbole!

Edited December 29, 2006 by FlaSoxxJim

[Balta1701]

So, last week, pointing out that the Bush administration had covered up a report strongly suggesting that U.S. subsidies for oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico were essentially wasted basically received a ho-hum reception here. So somehow, I doubt that a few billion more in graft will raise the hairs on anyone's neck, but hey, why not, someone other than me has to be sick of them wasting The American people's money.

The Justice Department is investigating whether the director of a multibillion-dollar oil-trading program at the Interior Department has been paid as a consultant for oil companies hoping for contracts.

 

The director of the program and three subordinates, all based in Denver, have been transferred to different jobs and have been ordered to cease all contacts with the oil industry until the investigation is completed some time next spring, according to officials involved.

 

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation had not been announced publicly, said investigators were worried that senior government officials had been steering huge oil-trading contracts to favored companies.

lmost every time a company drills for oil or gas on federal property, it's supposed to pay a royalty or tax to the government, CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian reports. But CBS News has learned from a Congressional source that the federal agency responsible for collecting billions of dollars in those royalties has routinely failed to hold the companies accountable.

 

According to the source, the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) audits only about 20 percent of the companies. The rest of the time, the payments are made on the honor system. But the government agency "could not accurately count" its own oil and gas audits — and as a result, it has reported audits that never occurred.

Gale Norton is back providing oversight of energy development issues on public lands in the American West, this time as a key legal advisor for a major global oil company.

 

Months after she resigned her cabinet post as President Bush's Interior Secretary—and then seemed to disappear from public view—the Coloradan apparently has accepted an offer to serve as counsel for Royal Dutch Shell PLC.

[EvilMonkey]

I credit Boxer for taking a stand against CAIR, something I wish Bush would do.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16384987/site/newsweek/

 

Of course, CAIR blames the joooos, Islamofascism and even bring up McCarthy. Seems they know all the PC buttons to push, eh?

[Balta1701]

I believe, that we will be able to withdraw a significant number of our men and women in uniform from Iraq by the end of this year and even more by next year. And I express that optimism based on the election and formation of the new Iraqi unity government, the increasing capacity of the Iraqi security forces to protect their own people, and the commitment of the new government to disarm the sectarian militias.

Joe Lieberman, June 2006.

 

So I am confident that the situation is improving enough on the ground that by the end of this year, we will begin to draw down significant numbers of American troops, and by the end of the next year more than half of the troops who are there now will be home.

Joe Lieberman, July 06

[Balta1701]

Reasons why private health insurers have rejected people for coverage in the state of California in recent years:

 

1. Expected fatherhood.

2. Jock itch (successfully treated with cream).

 

And I'm sure a national health care system of some sort would make things vastly less efficient.

[Balta1701]

I think one of the most fun aspects of the new majority is going to be watching the 2 sides completely flip-flop on everything that involves the power structure in Congress.

 

2 years ago, Nancy Pelosi wrote a proposal for a "Minority bill of rights" in the House. 24 hours to review bills for all sides, full chance to offer debates and amendments for both sides, etc.

 

Dennis Hastert didn't even bother replying to Mrs. Pelosi's proposal.

 

Now, 3 Republicans are writing a letter to Mrs. Pelosi asking if she'll implement the very same proposal that Dennis Haster pocket-vetoed 2 years ago.

 

Fun times, I tells ya what.

 

Hopefully Pelosi will actually implement this at some point...but I'd still pocket-veto their letter for a few weeks just out of spite.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think one of the most fun aspects of the new majority is going to be watching the 2 sides completely flip-flop on everything that involves the power structure in Congress.

 

2 years ago, Nancy Pelosi wrote a proposal for a "Minority bill of rights" in the House. 24 hours to review bills for all sides, full chance to offer debates and amendments for both sides, etc.

 

Dennis Hastert didn't even bother replying to Mrs. Pelosi's proposal.

 

Now, 3 Republicans are writing a letter to Mrs. Pelosi asking if she'll implement the very same proposal that Dennis Haster pocket-vetoed 2 years ago.

 

Fun times, I tells ya what.

 

Hopefully Pelosi will actually implement this at some point...but I'd still pocket-veto their letter for a few weeks just out of spite.

She should see to it that her Minority Bill of Rights is passed as quickly as possible. And then she, and the rest of the Dems, if they have half a brain, should publicize that signing (and the difference between that and the Hastert stonewall) as widely and as often as possible.

[Balta1701]

So, it's pretty hard to read this and not immediately have the thought 2016 pop into your head.

In his first annual address to the Legislature, Gov. Eliot Spitzer proposed to overhaul almost every corner of the state’s operations and policies, saying he would move swiftly to guarantee health insurance for all children in the state, publicly finance state elections, rein in spending and draft a constitutional amendment to overhaul the state’s courts.

 

He also said that he would seek to broadly overhaul the state’s ethics and lobbying rules, to make pre-kindergarten available to all four-year-olds by the end of his four-year term, to overhaul the public authorities that control most of the state’s debt and to make New York more palatable to business by changing the state’s approach to policies, like workers’ compensation.

 

“Make no mistake, the changes I just described will not be easy, but change rarely is,” he said near the end of his speech, which was delivered in the chamber of the State Assembly here. “At every major transition point in out history, we have experienced uncertainty and growing pains. We will experience them again.”

(Oh, and he's a Colbert guy too) Edited January 4, 2007 by Balta1701

[Balta1701]

After 216 years...America finally has a woman serving as speaker of the House.

[Rex Kickass]

Yet America has fewer women in federal office than both Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Balta1701]

It never ends.

 

In late December, before departing forever, the Republican Congress passed a "postal reform bill" which, among other things, adjusts some of the ways postal workers are taken care of and streamlines the process for postal service price increases. Here's a negative piece on it from the Postal workers union, in case you want to read more about what is actually in the bill.

 

Mr. Bush signed the bill on December 20th. Of course, while he was busily affixing his signature, the White House also issued a signing statement to go along with it. In that signing statement, the White House asserted that, once again seemingly in contravention of the law, in emergency circumstances the White House has the ability to seize and read the mail of anyone it wants without a warrant. The White House also casually failed to define what it means by emergency circumstances, so we could be talking about a letter bomb, or just being at yellow alert.

Edited January 4, 2007 by Balta1701

[EvilMonkey]

It never ends.

 

In late December, before departing forever, the Republican Congress passed a "postal reform bill" which, among other things, adjusts some of the ways postal workers are taken care of and streamlines the process for postal service price increases. Here's a negative piece on it from the Postal workers union, in case you want to read more about what is actually in the bill.

 

Mr. Bush signed the bill on December 20th. Of course, while he was busily affixing his signature, the White House also issued a signing statement to go along with it. In that signing statement, the White House asserted that, once again seemingly in contravention of the law, in emergency circumstances the White House has the ability to seize and read the mail of anyone it wants without a warrant. The White House also casually failed to define what it means by emergency circumstances, so we could be talking about a letter bomb, or just being at yellow alert.

So having a rate increase ceiling means that postal workers take a pay cut? That's sure the way the article makes it seem, when in fact, what it does is force them to have to become more efficient, in their operating systems and hiring practices. I work with the PO every day in running my printshop, and let me tell you, they suck. Just about everyone at the 2 I go to should be fired. Half don't know beans about bulk mailing, which is less than I know! Most are very indifferent or rude and customer service seems like an oxymoron. And the stories I hear from my mother-in-law, who works at the Gary processing center? Oh boy. 20/20 should go do a hidden camera story there if even 10% of what she tells me are true.

[Balta1701]

So having a rate increase ceiling means that postal workers take a pay cut? That's sure the way the article makes it seem, when in fact, what it does is force them to have to become more efficient, in their operating systems and hiring practices. I work with the PO every day in running my printshop, and let me tell you, they suck. Just about everyone at the 2 I go to should be fired. Half don't know beans about bulk mailing, which is less than I know! Most are very indifferent or rude and customer service seems like an oxymoron. And the stories I hear from my mother-in-law, who works at the Gary processing center? Oh boy. 20/20 should go do a hidden camera story there if even 10% of what she tells me are true.

Gimme a break, that's the first story that popped up when I googled the bill to see what the focus of it actually was, and at least it outlined what the actual goal of the reform bill was (clearly not to give the President authority to open mail under whatever it defines as "exigent circumstances.")

 

Anywho, flipping topics again, since I had a different article I wanted to post anyway.

 

On October 19th, 2006, George W. Bush signed a bill requiring the White House to appoint a "Policy Coordinator" for North Korea within 60 days. It has currently been 79 days since Mr. Bush signed that bill into law. The position remains unfilled.

[Balta1701]

I seriously Can't wait until this guy's in jail. He'd probably already be there had the DOJ not done that search of his Congressional office last year - that's kept this case tied up in court for months, so that the indictments haven't yet come down.

On only the fourth day of the new year, we’ve decided that the 2007 “Some Nerve!” award goes to ... Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.).

 

You might think that a guy who’s still the subject of a federal bribery investigation would be more careful than to use taxpayer resources to raise campaign money. But nope, not Jefferson. And heck, he still hasn’t provided us with that “honorable explanation” he promised for the bizarro (and alleged) $90,000 in cash federal agents confiscated from a freezer in his Capitol Hill home.

 

Last week, House Democrats were shocked to receive a letter from Jefferson — on his official Congressional stationery, no less — asking colleagues to donate money to help him retire his campaign debt.

 

“As you know,” the letter, dated Dec. 29, 2006, began, “I recently won a grueling race for re-election.” (And won resoundingly in a runoff, despite the ongoing federal probe in which two people have already pleaded guilty.) “In order to get our message out and otherwise compete, we incurred over $200,000 in debt.

 

“Therefore, I would deeply appreciate it if you would assist me in retiring my debt by contributing $1,000 (or whatever amount you can afford) to my campaign,” Jefferson wrote.

 

Nice letter. Too bad it violates House ethics rules. It’s a no-no to use taxpayer resources to raise campaign dough.

 

Some Democratic aides were downright aghast at Jefferson’s audacity at using franked envelopes, official letterhead and the House internal mail service in a blatant violation of House rules.

 

“We were going to send him a check in a freezer bag,” joked one chief of staff to a Democratic Member of Congress who received Jefferson’s solicitation.

 

Another, only slightly snarkier, Democratic House chief of staff pitched in with: “He’s got $90,000 in his freezer, why can’t he buy some stationery and stamps?” (Answer: Because the Feds took the money!) The chief of staff added, “Some people will never learn. Can’t he go away already?”

[Balta1701]

"No back rubs" - German Chancellor Merkel to George W. Bush at a press conference today.

[NorthSideSox72]

"No back rubs" - German Chancellor Merkel to George W. Bush at a press conference today.

I think it was Bush to Merkel.

[Soxy]

"No back rubs" - German Chancellor Merkel to George W. Bush at a press conference today.

Well, I am heartened if that blurb is true that he's listening to Merkel.

[Balta1701]

January 5, 2007

 

President George W. Bush

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

 

Dear Mr. President:

 

The start of the new Congress brings us opportunities to work together on the critical issues confronting our country. No issue is more important than finding an end to the war in Iraq. December was the deadliest month of the war in over two years, pushing U.S. fatality figures over the 3,000 mark.

 

The American people demonstrated in the November elections that they don’t believe your current Iraq policy will lead to success and that we need a change in direction for the sake of our troops and the Iraqi people. We understand that you are completing your post-election consultations on Iraq and are preparing to make a major address on your Iraq strategy to the American people next week.

 

Clearly this address presents you with another opportunity to make a long overdue course correction. Despite the fact that our troops have been pushed to the breaking point and, in many cases, have already served multiple tours in Iraq, news reports suggest that you believe the solution to the civil war in Iraq is to require additional sacrifices from our troops and are therefore prepared to proceed with a substantial U.S. troop increase.

 

Surging forces is a strategy that you have already tried and that has already failed. Like many current and former military leaders, we believe that trying again would be a serious mistake. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution. Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq.

 

In a recent appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, General John Abizaid, our top commander for Iraq and the region, said the following when asked about whether he thought more troops would contribute to our chances for success in Iraq:

 

“I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no. And the reason is, because we want the Iraqis to do more. It's easy for the Iraqis to rely upon to us do this work. I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future.”

 

Rather than deploy additional forces to Iraq, we believe the way forward is to begin the phased redeployment of our forces in the next four to six months, while shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror. A renewed diplomatic strategy, both within the region and beyond, is also required to help the Iraqis agree to a sustainable political settlement . . In short, it is time to begin to move our forces out of Iraq and make the Iraqi political leadership aware that our commitment is not open ended, that we cannot resolve their sectarian problems, and that only they can find the political resolution required to stabilize Iraq.

 

Our troops and the American people have already sacrificed a great deal for the future of Iraq. After nearly four years of combat, tens of thousands of U.S. casualties, and over $300 billion dollars, it is time to bring the war to a close. We, therefore, strongly encourage you to reject any plans that call for our getting our troops any deeper into Iraq. We want to do everything we can to help Iraq succeed in the future but, like many of our senior military leaders, we do not believe that adding more U.S. combat troops contributes to success.

 

We appreciate you taking these views into consideration.

 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi

[mr_genius]

didn't Harry Reid vote for the Iraq war? just curious.

 

if he did it was bad vote on his part, backtracking now i suppose.