I received the following communication from MoveOn warning about Bush's plan toward to restrict access to contraceptive methods deemed to be "abortificants" by the Right-To-Lifers. The letter includes a link to sign on to a letter protesting Bush's planned moves to circumvent the Congress to install new rules in the guise of "regulations."

Click here to sign an emergency message to the Department of Health and Human Services: "Contraception is NOT abortion.

The House Judiciary Committee today, Friday, July 25th, will put Impeachment squarely back "on the table" and restored to its prominent place in our Constitution.

Wednesday 07/25/2008 - 10:00 AM
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Full Committee
By Direction of the Chairman

originally posted 2008-07-09 00:03:03 -- bumped, cho

I was heartened last February when the University of Virginia's Miller Center of Pubic Affairs announced the formation of the National War Powers Commission, and I was ecstatic to hear the commission would be headed by foreign policy heavyweights James A. Baker III and Warren Christopher. The results of the Commission's intensive studies have just hit the street, and I couldn't be more disenchanted.

The Commission proposes a new and improved War Powers Consultation Act of 2009 to replace the old broken down War Powers Resolution of 1973. Lamentably, when you read the old and new titles, you've seen all the substantial difference there is between the proposed Act and the standing Resolution.

As we wait for the many coming books, I'm sure more will be surfacing, as many try to cleanse their souls, of these last eight years plus, in seeking their higher kingdom, we might have the time to take this seemingly telling descriptive tale into the fold of good reading. We could even make the copies a collective item reminding us, in a comfortable way, of what we've been put through, us and the rest of the world. Comfortable because it might not enrage as we read and study the pictures, like the hard reality of the history will.

"Vlad" Gingrich is molesting the Constitution in the name of national security again. This time he's on a tirade about the recent Supreme Court decision that grants prisoners held at young Mr. Bush's pleasure in Guantanamo the right to a habeas corpus hearing.

"This court decision is a disaster and it could cost us a city," Newt said on Face the Nation. Land o' Goshen. The only way this court decision could cost us a city is if it makes Newt's head explode. Driving Newt's noodle to critical mass would be the kind of disaster we need, but it would force us to make some difficult decisions. Losing New York City or Washington D.C. might be too high a price to pay to be permanently rid of Newt, but if we're talking, say, Minot, North Dakota, well…

I take that back. Minot's a lovely city and we have a strategically significant military base there. We'll blow Newt's noggin to smithereens in that chancre sore on the Potomac. Let's just make sure all the politicians are in town when we push the plunger.

route66 has a diary up about today, Flag Day here in these United States.

I was going to post up something I found recently that attempts to explain some recent occurances on the meaning of 'Patriotism', and a tie in with 'route66' diary is appropriate on this day.

That's the question asked by The Real News Network

Back on Thursday, May 15, 2008 I asked a question as well: PEACE Is A Political Statement?.

How Hillary Can Knock-Out Obama

Joel S. Hirschhorn

Now is the time for Hilary Clinton to take a bold position that in one brilliant, courageous stroke shows the nation that she is more willing to pursue true reforms of the two-party plutocratic political system than Obama is.

With this position she can reveal that all the Obama talk about change is just a clever campaign strategy to seduce people who rightfully are fed up with politics as usual.

originally posted 2008-04-13 16:50:56 -0500' bumped and promoted again by carol white because I think JH has said a lot of important things here.

“I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” – from the U.S. military officer oath

In an April 10 speech at the White House, Mr. Bush stated that, “two of the greatest threats to America in this new century” are “al Qaeda and Iran.” For once in his presidency, Mr. Bush is probably right. Al Qaeda and Iran, in fact, may be America’s only two remaining foreign threats.

Russia and China won’t try to beat us militarily; they’ll take us down economically. Europe doesn’t even need to take us down economically because it already has: The European Union’s gross domestic product surpassed ours by about $600 billion in 2007. Australia’s happy the way it is; Japan won’t rock the boat. South America is too corrupt. Africa is far too hot and Canada’s too cold, as the song by Randy Newman says.

Yep, as far as significant foreign enemies go, Iran and al-Qaeda are about it: a country with an gross domestic product and defense budget barely six percent of America’s, and an “organization” with no economy or navy or air force at all, and no proper army to speak of.

Mr. Bush was telling us, in the Freudian fashion he so often utilizes, that the enemies we really need to worry about are of the domestic variety.

"…Having been in Iraq, you know that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard has assisted the militias and others in killing our Americans and in maiming them."

-- Hillary Clinton, to an Iraq War veteran at the Democratic presidential candidates' debate in Las Vegas, Nevada on November 16, 2007