Whose Government is it Again?

Abraham Lincoln, The Gettysburg Address, November 19, 1963, Gettysburg, PA:

"...government of the people, by the people, for the people,..."


George W. Bush, in response to a question about the looming no-confidence vote on Attorney General, Alberto Gonzalez, June 11, 2007, Sofia, Bulgaria:

"Yes, it's an interesting comment about Congress, isn't it, that, on the one hand, they say that a good general shouldn't be reconfirmed, and on the other hand, they say that my Attorney General shouldn't stay. And I find it interesting. I guess it reflects the political atmosphere of Washington. And they can try to have their votes of no confidence, but it's not going to determine -- make the determination who serves in my government."

Whose government is it Mr. Bush?  It's your Administration, but it sure ain't your government.
Please read the Constitution of the United States, a document you swore to uphold and defend.  You've done neither.  Please understand the separation of powers, all power is NOT VESTED in a single executive.  Your power to execute treaties and nominate public officials, among others, is with the ADVICE and CONSENT of the SENATE.  They have every right to not reconfirm a general or to issue a vote of no-confidence on the AG.

Signed,
One VERY PISSED OFF "lucy"

Tancredo on Roe

From DH:

When I couldn't sleep last night, I watched some event that most of the Republican candidates were at. They took their turns speaking. The scariest comment of the night came from Mr. Tancredo: "I oppose Roe. I promise to free women from the bondage of legalized abortion."

My response:

Tom Tancredo is frickin' scary.  I don't feel that I'm in bondage over having a choice of what to do with my body.  However, if I am forced to do something with my body that I don't want to, then I may feel like I'm in bondage.

I admit it...

This is pretty funny and I'm posting it here since MySpace doesn't seem to like it.
I've always said I was a computer nerd, here's proof. It said the average for gals is 38 and for guys is 56. Woohoo! I'm above average.

Oh no he didn't say that!

From SFGate:

"Democratic presidential candidates on Wednesday rebuked Republican rival Rudy Giuliani for suggesting that the United States could face another major terrorist attack if a Democrat is elected in 2008. The former New York mayor did not back down."
(emphasis added)

Questions:

Q: Who was President of the US on September 11, 2001?
A: George W. Bush

Q: What is George W. Bush's party affliation?
A: Republican

Q: Where was Rudy Giuliani on September 11, 2001?
A: Doing damage control after the World Trade Center was attacked.  (Probably the only thing he did right during an otherwise dismal turn as mayor of NYC.)

Q: What is Rudy Giuliani's party affiliation?
A: Republican

Q: Any more questions?

And they're afraid we'll have another terrorist attack if a Democrat is elected?

WOW!

Hummingbirds

My father passed away 25 years ago this August. It was 5 weeks before my 17th birthday. It was sudden, a heart attack in his sleep.

He is buried in Colma, a town just south of San Francisco. The local joke is that there are more dead people than living people in Colma.
(Colma became the town for burials after San Francisco outlawed burials within the city limits in 1900 and all bodies were exhumed by 1937. You can read a real brief history of Colma here).

My Dad and I were close, so it was only natural that on the morning of my wedding, I go up to Colma (20 minute drive) and talk to him.

Colma is one of those towns on the San Francisco Peninsula that is usually very foggy and cold. In the, at the time, nearly 15 years I had been visiting him, I usually had to dress warmly. There were a few sunny days, but that was the exception, not the norm. (On one particularly cold and foggy day, they turned on the sprinklers as I sat there.)

So, the morning of my wedding I head up to Colma, and it's a beautiful day. The sun was out, there was no fog to be seen. I sit down on the ground and talk to my Dad and meditate and do whatever. The next thing I know, there are two hummingbirds flitting about the nearby hedge. Not only in those nearly 15 years had sun been a rarity, but I never saw hummingbirds there. And I've seen no hummingbirds in the 10 years since.

That, to me, was a message from my Dad, that he was blessing my marriage. Looking back on what we've been through in the last 10 years, it's nice to know that he might be watching out for us. I get chills every time I think about that morning and probably will for the rest of my life.

CNN Breaking News... HA!

>>>Subject: CNN Breaking News
>>>-- Larry Birkhead is the father of Anna Nicole Smith's baby, a court
in the Bahamas rules. Birkhead said he hopes to have custody soon.

Oh I am SO GLAD this was breaking news. I've been on the edge of my
seat for days knowing they were releasing this info today.

NOT!!!

Like there's nothing else going on in the world that they need to track
the baby daddy of some tragic playboy bunny gold-digger.
Dear god, that child is destined for a tragic life. (Christina Onassis
anyone?)

Okay let's see:
war in Iraq and Afghanistan (remember that one?);
impending war in Iran;
delegations to Syria and North Korea;
murders on the streets of Oakland, San Francisco, and other cities;
the destruction of the middle class;
hell, even Imus's comments about the Rutgers Women's basketball team and
the ensuing firestorm.

UGH!

</soapbox>

flag-burning amendment

If you all didn't already know, there is a flag-burning amendment going through Congress.  It has already passed the House and needs only one vote in the Senate.  Our illustrious Senator Feinstein is in favor of this amendment.  I just called her DC office and told the staffer I disagreed with the Senator.  She simply registered my complaint, didn't ask me about it. 

 

Feinstein's statement is here.  She says, "This amendment would do one thing only: give Congress the opportunity to construct, deliberately and carefully, precise statutory language that clearly defines the contours of prohibitive conduct."  She goes on, "I believe a Constitutional Amendment returning to our flag the protected status it has had through most of this nation’s history, and that it deserves, is consistent with free speech. (...) Securing protection for this powerful symbol of America would be an important, but very limited, change to Constitution."

Contrast her quote with that from the ACLU:
""The symbol should not be valued more than the freedoms it represents," said Terri Ann Schroeder, ACLU Senior Lobbyist."

Here is a good editorial in the LA Times about why flag burning should not be constitutionally banned:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-ed-flag27jun27,1,1143144.story?coll=la-news-comment.  (I've copied it below, it appears you need a login to the Times site.)

If you are opposed to this amendment to the Constitution (this ain't just a law) folks, you can contact her office at http://feinstein.senate.gov/ or call her at (202) 224-3841.

 

-hgs

 

 

EDITORIAL

The case for flag-burning

An amendment banning it would make America less free.

June 27, 2006

THERE ARE MANY ARGUMENTS AGAINST a proposed constitutional amendment to outlaw "the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Let us count the ways in which the amendment, which is disturbingly close to the 67 votes required for Senate approval, is unworthy of that body's support:

 

•  It's a "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist. There has been no epidemic of flag-burning since the Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that destruction of Old Glory as a protest was symbolic speech protected by the 1st Amendment.

•  The reintroduction of this amendment is part of the Republican Party's election-year attempt to rile up its social-conservative base, a "panderama" that already has produced a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, which failed earlier this month. That reality alone should cause Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to reconsider her support for the flag-burning amendment.

 

•  As Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) pointed out, "The 1st Amendment has served us well for over 200 years. I don't think it needs to be altered." Placing a no-flag-burning asterisk next to the amendment's sweeping guarantee of free speech is a mischievous idea, and it could invite amendments to ban other sorts of speech Americans find offensive.

But the best argument against the flag amendment is the one some opponents are reluctant to make for fear of political fallout: It would make America less free.

Rare as flag-burning may be, a nation that allows citizens to denounce even its most sacred symbols is being true to what the Supreme Court in 1964 called the "profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials."

In that decision, and in 1989, the court interpreted the free-speech protections of the 1st Amendment generously but correctly. The Senate, including Feinstein and fellow Democrat and Californian Barbara Boxer (who has opposed a flag-burning amendment in the past), should let those decisions be.

VOTE DAMMIT!

Sitting here watching the news. Man-on-the-street interviews, people saying that nothing about the election interests them: same old mud-slinging, nothing that interests them about the issues... so, the gubernatorial race sucks, there are other interesting races (Dem Secretary of State and Dem Controller, for starters) that if you look past the "big" race, you might find something. Besides, while the issues NOW don't concern you, future issues may and then you'll care who makes those decisions. But, if you don't vote now, you have NO RIGHT to bitch later. You have to participate in the process in order to have a say. I know, you'll bitch anyway. Talk to the hand, your words will fall on deaf ears if you haven't participated in the process.

AIDS: 25 years of an epidemic

So, today is the 25th anniversary of the CDC report that 5 gay men were treated for a rare form of pneumonia, later to be identified as AIDS. I lived near "ground zero" of the AIDS epidemic. I grew up in San Francisco, in the Haight Ashbury, just over the hill from the Castro. We had gay neighbors, both upstairs and next door. It was no big deal to me that two men were living together in each of those flats. As long as they loved and respected each other, I didn't care what they did in their bedrooms. Heck, I don't care what ANYONE, hetero- or homosexual does in their bedrooms... it's none of my business! (On today's news, I heard a "man-on-the-street" interview the Gay/Straight Alliance Parade in Los Altos. The man said he didn't *really* have a problem with this sort of thing, as long as they didn't rub it in his face. What the hell does that mean? Does that mean you don't want to see two men holding hands or two women hugging? Fine, then hetero couples shouldn't either. Don't rub it in his face. Sheesh!) Anyway, I digress...

My DH sent an email to his family today, mainly what he said at http://mootepoint.blogspot.com/2006/06/grim-milestone.html, except with the following links:

The SF Chronicle also has several articles online at http://www.sfgate.com/aidsat25. In case you don’t have time to look at all their extensive coverage, here are a couple of highlights:

This 1982 article by Randy Shilts (author of And the Band Played On) is a tear-jerker:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/17/DDGVB5133M1.DTL

The article contains a “more things change, the more they stay the same” line: “And when one gay victim of pneumocystis lapsed into a semi-coma, his relatives tried to strike his lover's name from the guest list and forbid him from seeing the dying man”

This picture is worth a quick look. It’s a heartbreaker that everybody should see as a reminder:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?o=1&f=/c/a/2006/06/04/ING97J7LD31.DTL

I humbly request that everybody take a moment to remember the half million Americans who have died over the last 25 years, the lost generation in Africa, and the continued problem throughout the world--and hope that we can solve this soon. We lit a yahrtzeit candle last night."

I took his email and forwarded it to my mom and sister with the following commentary:

"I'm forwarding D's email to you because we lived at ground zero of the start of the AIDS epidemic.

I remember the friends that disappeared. I remember the guy upstairs who just wanted to die at home when that eviction crap went on. (God help me, I forget his name.)

I was in tears reading the article and picture D. referenced. While AIDS is no longer just a "gay man's disease", I get angered by the young gay men who don't know to remember and don't take precautions because AIDS is now manageable. Why not try to eradicate it than live with it? Look at what's happened in Africa, in poor communities, in our community.

And today, of all days, Bush is giving a speech in favor of a constitutional amendment to ban "gay marriage" and the Senate is debating this issue. Have they no compassion for those who have died? For those who continue to live with HIV/AIDS? "Gay marriage" is not unnatural to me. Again, I think of the guys upstairs and next door on Central. I don't think growing up around the "gay lifestyle" has made me a bad person or weakened my marriage. Sure, D. and I have seen our share of challenges, but frankly, "gay marriage" is not one of them!

I just want to scream at the people who don't want their kids around the "gay lifestyle", at the people who think that their marriage is threatened by "Adam and Steve" getting married. At those people who won't talk about AIDS because it's a "gay disease", a "poor disease", a disease in Africa that doesn't affect us.

D. keeps telling me I had an unusual childhood. Maybe I'm just more enlightened than most folks, but I just don't understand, I really don't and it makes me very sad."

Today's Random Thoughts

I'm watching the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for Alberto Gonzales, the nominee for Attorney General.  Russ Feingold is questioning about executions in Texas... I can't help but think that this man has a lot of blood on his hands... I'm not even talking about his view on torture.

 

Here is the email I sent to Senator Boxer yesterday asking her to stand up and support Rep. Conyers to challenge the outcome of the election:

 

Dear Senator Boxer,

I am writing to ask you to stand with Congressman Conyers tomorrow, January 6, to challenge the voting tally from the November 2nd election. I know that this challenge will do nothing to overturn the result of this election, however, it is important to open a dialogue about voting inconsistencies and problems in this country.

I volunteered for your Congressional campaign when I was in high school as part of a Civics assignment. One of the most important duties an American citizen can do is vote. If people feel their votes don't count, they won't vote and that will be the end of our great American experiment.

Please consider supporting Congressman Conyers to give all Americans a Civics lesson on how the Constitution should work.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

LucyMercury

Redwood City, CA

 

Barbara Boxer has signed onto the challenge!  (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=389317 and http://boxer.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=230446)  Democracy isn't dead!

 

I'm watching the debate in the House.  The Republicans that are standing up are being downright nasty about this.  It's as if they expected to steamroll the outcome.  While we all know the outcome of this debate, this allows the debate to begin.  The Republicans talk about how Kerry conceded... concession doesn't mean the votes shouldn't be counted.  There were irregularies, our voting system needs to be repaired.  We tell the Iraqis and the Ukranians how to vote, but we need to clean up our house first!  Most of the Repuglicans I've heard are not acknowledging the merits of the objection!

Nancy Pelosi: "Today we are witnessing democracy at work.  this isn't frivolous..."

Sherrod Brown, Rep from Ohio and former Secty of State of Ohio: "Defending the right to vote should be a concern for Republicans and Democrats alike!"

THE F*CKING REPUGLICANS JUST DON'T GET IT!!!  The Dems are challenging the process, not the result.  The Republicans keep on about the Dems challenging Bush's victory.  Me thinks many of them see that Ohio's election was not fair and legal, but won't address it.  Flockers!

Who is this Repuglican asshole who is vilifying Senator Boxer for following Michael Moore's lead? OMG!

 

My followup to Senator Boxer:

Dear Senator Boxer,

 

Please allow me to add my voice to those who have thanked you for your action today.  You standing up for your principles is truly inspiring to me.  I am proud that you are my Senator.

 

Sincerely,

 

LucyMercury

Redwood City, CA

 

 

Okay, I'm done for now....

Ruskin v Poizner

Okay, let's see if I can do this rationally...

I live in the 21st Assembly District in California. Our Assemblyman has termed out and is running for State Senate, so two new guys are running. The Democrat is Ira Ruskin. He serves on the Redwood City City Council, has been mayor of our city (largest city in the district), and has a good record on the issues important to me. (Guess who I'm voting for?!?) His Republican opponent is Steve Poizner, a rich man who is out-raising Ruskin 4-1. (Another example of a Republican trying to buy an election in California. Haven't they figured out that it doesn't work?) It's been a pretty nasty race, especially for a State Assembly seat. It's also a Democratic district and has had Democratic representation for a very long time.

Lately these guys have been sending out mailers trying to affirm their positions and cut down that of their opponent, but this time Poizner really got to me. He has never served on a city council, but was a White House fellow, starting in September 2001... that means under THIS president. He states that he is a moderate Republican and is pro-choice and has gotten a pro-choice rating from Planned Parenthood.

Ruskin's campaign material points out that Poizner "contributed thousands of dollars to national pro-life council endorsed candidates". Guess what?!?! This isn't a lie. A simple check of the Federal Elections Commission website shows that Poizner has contributed $18,000 to political committees since 2000. Granted, he contributed $2,000 to Kerry in February 2001. However, he contributed $2,000 to George Bush in June 2003 and $2,000 to the Congressional campaign of Kris Kobach in Kansas. Who is this Kris Kobach person? Well, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, "The other donation in question was to a Kansas congressional candidate who served with Poizner in a nonpartisan White House fellowship program." So, Poizner is just giving money to his "bud". The implication being that since the program was non-partisan, the money must be, too. (Poizner's using this quote in his campaign literature, he's trying to get readers to believe that this is a logical progression.) But guess what? This "bud" has been endorsed by Kansans for Life "as an especially attractive candidate to pro-life citizens." (Right off Kobach's website!)

So, our pro-choice "rated" candidate is endorsing candidates attractive to pro-life citizens both in Kansas and nationally (because you canNOT tell me that George W. Bush is not anti-choice!) While the man is free to give his money to whomever he chooses (notice he gave the maximum contribution in all cases), if he is TRULY PRO-CHOICE why would he give money to candidates that advance the anti-choice agenda!??!!?!?

Are you freaking kidding me?!?!?!

A CIA report released today said that Saddam Hussein did not have have stockpiles of weapons and didn't have a program in place to create them. "The massive report does say, however, that Iraq worked hard to cheat on United Nations-imposed sanctions and retain the capability to resume production of WMD at some time in the future." (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/06/iraq.wmd.report/index.html) "The report was released nearly two years ago to the day that President Bush ... told the audience that Saddam Hussein's Iraq 'possesses and produced chemical and biological weapons' and 'is seeking nuclear weapons.'" ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?!?!?! Bush FREAKING LIED about going to war, Saddam's worse transgression was to circumvent the sanctions and to think about weapons, but there was nothing, NOTHING that directly threatened America. He didn't have 'em and he didn't produce 'em. As Senator Jay Rockefeller, D- W. Va. said, "In short, we invaded a country, thousands of people have died, and Iraq never posed a grave or growing danger."

George W. Bush has to be the most dangerous man in the world, his actions have caused the mess in Iraq, as well as Iran and North Korea ramping up their nuclear programs. He bitches about Saddam's intent, but he should be reminded that the U.S. is still the only country in the world to actually deploy nuclear weapons. He uses "September the eleventh" as his excuse for EVERYTHING, that the world has changed since then and we need to be safer. I say there's no way to know if we are safer than September 10, 2001 cuz we don't have anything to compare it to. On 9/10/2001, I thought our airport security sucked and today, 10/7/2004, I still think it sucks. But, then again, I've been to Israel. El Al's security is the best in the world and until we achieve such a level, we're no safer than that fateful day. Sure there have been no attacks on American soil since then, but there have been attacks against American interests and allies. Shrub hasn't kept the terrorists off our soil, I don't think they will attack again on American soil, they don't need to, they've won, we've sufficiently changed our way of life that we're worried about them. Especially when the freaking Bush Administration puts out predictable "terror alerts". (And we know they will increase as we move closer to the election.)

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!

On a related note, cuz George Bush is partly to blame, three (3!) bombs went off at Israeli vacation spots in Egypt. IN EGYPT!!! They're freaking attacking Jews on Arab soil!!!! I was hoping there would be no attacks during the chagim. There weren't, they waited until after, when people were decompressing (my word) from the holidays. According to the Jerusalem Post a previously unknown group called World Islamist Group is claiming responsibility in the name of "martyrs dying in Palestine and Iraq."

I've been in tears for the last hour or so between hearing about the Duelfer report and the bombs in Egypt. This stuff makes me sick to my stomach. Shrub has so f*cked up the world ... he HAS to be defeated on November 2! We can't handle anymore of his actions. He blames everyone and everything else except himself, he refuses to admit that he's done anything wrong. Hmmm.... seems to me that only God is infallible, man makes mistakes and Bush claims to be God-fearing. F*cking hypocrite.

I don't understand!

Okay, I just don't get it. I was just reading a post over on the Weight Watchers boards. This woman posted that Too-Stupid-to-be-President is going to be in her town. She can't attend the rally cuz they sanitize the crowds (my term) and only allow the big money donors into the rally. She says she is struggling week to week and that if she had extra funds they would go to groceries for the kids, not to a campaign that doesn't need it. Her husband has worked his ass off to register people and they don't get to go see TSTBP. Why the HELL are they still supporting this bozo? Ugh! It sounds like it's the whole, "But he shares my values" thing. I don't know why they're struggling, but I'm willing to bet it's due to Bush's stewardship (or lack thereof) of the economy, they live in Ohio, after all. Someone else posted that it's probably the local folks deciding who gets to attend... While the local folks may decide the who, the campaign directs what they want... and it's all very scripted. Remember, the "war president" who makes decisions from the oval office must be carefully scripted and can't speak without notecards or a prepared speech. (Remember his response when he was asked about mistakes he's made? He wished he had the f*cking question in advance!!!) Did anyone see his performance in the "debate" the other night? This man needs to be removed from office, he is a disgrace to our country!

If people want to be so damn stupid...

Okay, so I was reading an article at CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/13/bush.monday.ap.ap/index.html) about George Bush saying that the only way John Kerry can pay for his health care plan is to raise taxes. WTF?!?!? This coming from the (so-called) president who has run up the worse deficit in history and is insisting on making tax cuts permanent even though we're at war?!?! I still don't know how he plans to pay for the war, but he's bitching that Kerry will raise taxes. Does he know how to do basic math!?!!? But he goes on about his plan for Social Security... hello? Mr. President? We heard that sorry story back in 2000 and you did nothing, SQUAT about it in the last four years and you've got a republican congress that will do your bidding. So what do we get for the next four years? Empty promises and a long, drawn-out war that we don't belong in in the first place?!?! Hooray, you caught saddam hussein, but where the HELL is the dude that orchestrated the murder of 3000 of our citizens? You remember him...Bin Laden?
If people want to be so damn stupid and vote for this fool, fine, but frankly I don't want stupid people deciding something that they know so little about. So he shares your f*cking values: no gay marriage, no abortion, but those values won't give you a job, decent pay or healthcare. Go ahead and vote for him, but don't come bitching to me when your jobs go overseas and you have to work at walmart without healthcare, cuz I'll be busy trying to cover my own ass because of you stupid people.

wtf!??!?!?!

okay, i don't care how you feel about bill clinton's politics, but he is a human being! these people wishing him ill after his bypass surgery are f*cking, insensitive morons! president clinton is a father and a husband and to say such crap is just

for morons like rush limbaugh to say he opted for the quadruple bypass to go for the sympathy vote is just stupid.

ugh!

can anyone hear me?

welcome to my new blog. never thought i would do this, but i've decided i want a place to rant and rave about that which ticks me off. currently the state of politics in this country and how F*CKING stupid the republicans are.

now, let's get my typing style out of the way. i'm not emulating ee cummings, this dates back 15 years to a pre-internet online service called genie... it was text-based, so to make it easier to read, i would keep the echo off and type blindly. as a result punctuation and capitalization went by the wayside... i've since added punctuation, but have never seen a need to capitalize things when typing informally.

just my view of the world...