During the Clinton impeachment hearings, members of Congress spoke passionately about defending the rule of law. They spoke of performing their Constitutional duty in holding the president accountable for his alleged violations or “high crimes or misdemeanors”. I remember (then Representative, now Senator) Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, almost tearfully, explaining how he was loathe to discuss impeaching the president but how it was the course of action he was bound to because he had taken a solemn oath as an attorney and, now as a member of Congress. Most of the House managers as well as the senatorial jurors spoke solemnly of the heavy responsibility they felt to their constituents and to the country. However, in the end, the Constitution was clear that no one was above the law. The mere suggestion that those proceedings might be politically motivated was met with forceful denial and scholarly lectures on the proper roles of the House and Senate. In the end, Bill Clinton was charged and acquitted on counts of lying under oath and obstruction of justice. Congress was able to walk away saying that they had simply done their duty. This was “pre-9/11”.
It has become known that George W. Bush has authorized warrentless wiretaps of American citizens where the person on the other end of the call is a “suspected” terrorist outside the country. Bush himself has admitted this action directly to the American people. We have been told by some members of Congress that such authorizations might be in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. FISA was passed by Congress to address just this thing. Lending credibility to the charge, certain congressional committees are scrambling to re-write sections of that act to (retroactively) incorporate these warrentless wiretaps into the law. If the allegation is true, Bush would clearly be in violation of the 4th amendment to the Constitution which protects Americans from unreasonable search and seizure. One would think that such an allegation would lead to an investigation and, if enough evidence of wrongdoing were uncovered, possible articles of impeachment would be forthcoming. After all, isn’t it the Constitutional duty of Congress to investigate such allegations? Apparently not in this case. What we have heard from this congress is that investigating the Commander in Chief during “time of war” might undermine his ability to protect the country. Where are those members of congress who were so compelled to enforce the solemn duties of their office during the Clinton administration? Senator Orin Hatch of Utah, a central figure on the Judiciary Committee said recently, “Wartime is not a time to weaken the commander-in-chief.” What of Senator Graham (now a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee)? Speaking to a motion from Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, to simply censure Bush as a sort of slap on the wrist (just to let him know that Congress is paying attention), a much less remorseful Graham says, “Censure is destructive. Censure breaks us apart at a time when we need to be brought together.”
Now before anyone might think Senator Feingold's resolution is in any way partisan or political, consider that, thus far, only two of his fellow Democratic senators have signed on to co-sponsor this resolution. It seems that, during an election year, it might be bad politics to investigate the president. Apparently the American people might find the act of congressional oversight offensive.
So that we are clear about this, if your president lies under oath by parsing words (“It depends on what your definition of is is.”) articles of impeachment are a regrettable act of enforcing the Constitution. If, on the other hand, your “Commander Indefinite” violates the Constitution to spy on American citizens based on a hunch that they may be talking to a terrorist (note that there has yet to be one instance where anyone has been charged or tried under this action), we fall back on the old “all is fair in love and war” defense.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Friday, March 31, 2006
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/31/06
Americans Killed: 2326
Americans Wounded: 17,269
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,936
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Spc. Frederick A. Carlson, 25, Bethlehem, Pa., died in Taqqadum, Iraq on March 25.
*Sgt. Michael D. Rowe, 23, New Port Richey, Fla., died in Rutbah, Iraq on March 28.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2326
Americans Wounded: 17,269
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,936
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Spc. Frederick A. Carlson, 25, Bethlehem, Pa., died in Taqqadum, Iraq on March 25.
*Sgt. Michael D. Rowe, 23, New Port Richey, Fla., died in Rutbah, Iraq on March 28.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Saturday, March 25, 2006
A question of viablilty
Much has been made of the fact that Mark Wilson (candidate for US Senate – Democrat) has previously run for office as a Libertarian and a Green. Ironically, some of this talk is coming from the very people who now embrace (the 48th LD’s) Rodney Tom’s conversion from republican to Democrat but I guess that’s just the way some people “play politics”. To be honest, I was concerned about Mark’s previous political affiliations before I decided to support and endorse him (both individually and as part of the Progressive Caucus of Snohomish County Democrats ) so I decided to do some checking. To begin with, it should be noted that, politically, it is a widely accepted practice to run as a third party candidate at times to ensure that a particular message is heard or emphasized all the way through an election cycle. In my opinion, for Mark to have run as a Democrat in 2002 and 2004 (where the incumbents were universally embraced within their party) would certainly have silenced his voice immediately after the primary contest and would have left him shunned by virtually every faction of the party. I do not believe he has that same problem with Maria Cantwell. Progressive Democrats are distancing themselves from Sen. Cantwell like we haven't seen in some time.
To me, the most important factor in deciding support for a candidate is where they stand on the issues that I most identify with. Because it is Mark’s association with the Libertarians that most concerns Democrats, I thought it would be useful to look for statements and positions Mark took in 2002. Yes I know that Mark gave some solidly Libertarian (and now infamous) responses to some questions to newspaper interviews during his 2002 campaign. He spoke of eliminating the capital gains tax and opposing a national healthcare plan (using the “tort reform” angle for containing costs). However, the fact that he has since recanted those positions seems to have been lost in the “fog of politics”. The fact is that, while those were the questions asked, they were not the major issues that Mark was running on. What follows is from the “Issues” page of Mark’s 2002 campaign website.
Slash Corporate Welfare:
One of the greatest injustices in our country today is when the tax money of hard working Americans finds its way into the bank accounts of for-profit corporations. It happens in a million ways; from tax write-offs for foreign advertising and oil exploration to outright payments to huge agricultural conglomerates. Often, these corporations won their special subsidies after making large campaign finance contributions. Let's call these what they really are: bribes. This is the largest corruption scandal of our times. Vote for Mark Wilson, who will make eliminating corporate welfare a top priority in Washington DC.
Legally Manage Marijuana:
The second greatest government perpetrated injustice of our time comes as a result of the honorable desire to reduce mind-altering drug use in America. Though a reduction in drug abuse would be a great benefit to our country, prohibition just does not work. Even worse, prohibition increases violence, creates disincentives to seek treatment, increases temptation and corruption of our police, and destroys civil liberties. Buying, selling or growing marijuana is, after all a non-violent act. Another cost to our society comes from the huge costs of incarceration. Over a quarter of the inmates of our countries prisons and jails were put there for non-violent drug offenses. This not only represents a huge financial burden on taxpayers, but destroys the lives and the productivity of the "offenders." Have you ever heard of anyone dying of marijuana abuse? The statistics show that it is far safer than alcohol. It is time to legally manage marijuana.
Repeal the USA Patriot Act:
Mark Wilson will also work to repeal the USA Patriot Act which nullifies our right to be free from warrentless search and seizure and allows the executive branch to violate our privacy without probable cause.
Prevent Terrorism:
Aren't the Saudis wealthy enough to pay for their own defense? The US's interests in stability in the Persian Gulf region primarily come from oil companies' desire to preserve their existing contracts and relationships there. But whoever owns the oil will want to sell it, if not to us, then to the world market from which we buy. Propping up an unpopular, undemocratic, totalitarian government because it is friendly to US oil interests is another form of corporate welfare as well as a violation of the principles of individual liberty that make America great. Bin Laden's primary reason for attacking on 9/11/01 was the presence of "infidel soldiers" in the land of Mecca and Medina. The Saudis should buy their own tanks and aircraft, and hire mercenaries if they need to. Though internal security of Israel is a just cause, involuntarily taxing anti-Israeli US citizens to support the military of Israel is immoral. Instead we should reduce income taxes and allow the friends of Israel in this country to solicit and send money voluntarily to help this worthy cause.
Enhance our National Defense and Security:
While we are at it, after we bring Bin Laden and his top lieutenants to justice, let's gradually bring nearly all our troops home, and deploy them in a defensive configuration on US soil. Let's use our electronic surveillance technology on satellites and in aircraft to keep tabs on foreign troop and missile deployment. Let's make much of that data available to the public of all nations. We will be able to enhance our national defense, reduce our profile as a target, improve our security and safety from international threats, further the spread of democracy and international sovereignty, increase international stability and reduce US defense spending all at the same time. We can keep our military all-volunteer and the best in the world, while spending more money per soldier (including increasing their pay) and save taxpayer money all at the same time through refocusing our military priorities on defense instead of offense.
Preserve Privacy:
The federal government is forcing drivers' license standards on the States that would make the drivers' license a de-facto national identification card. The requirement of showing "government issued ID" at the airport is another trend in that direction. Soon you may have to show your identification papers on demand of a government official at any time. Video surveillance cameras are now installed at most major intersections and on some public streets and sports venues. These are often connected to software that can "recognize" faces and read license plates. This can allow people to know your comings and goings around town and to know when you are not home. In the name of keeping track of health statistics, the government has acquired the right to all of your medical information that is on file with your doctor. Government employees do not need to get your signed permission, or even inform you that they have opened your file. Do you want strangers (or even acquaintances in your community) in government to know if you are taking estrogen or anti-depressants? So far, public libraries and bookstores have defended your right to privacy by refusing to divulge lists of books you have checked out or bought, even if you are not under suspicion of having committed any crime. But the government is working to gain access to this information. Without a sense of privacy, people will fear getting the knowledge and information they need to fight entrenched interests that are contrary to the public good. The government has fought your right to use encryption software for your use of the internet and has reserved special "keys" so that it can read your e-mail without a warrant. Does this concern you even a little bit? What if this trend continues? Mark Wilson will defend your right to privacy in Congress.
Get Government out of Marriage:
Marriage is that most beautiful of contracts between individuals to love and be faithful. This contract is voluntarily chosen and negotiated. Any two individuals should be free to enter in to this kind of contract. The government has no business regulating who may or may not enter in to these kinds of agreements. Gays and lesbians must be free to marry anyone they choose. Tax laws must not discriminate against either married or single people. Furthermore, the rights of any two consenting adults to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own bedrooms must be preserved. Archaic and backward laws to the contrary must be repealed.
Preserve Freedom of Speech, Religion and of the Press:
Freedom of speech requires that the government not engage in censorship. Freedom of religion requires that the government not create any advantages or disadvantages for any particular religion in our society and no special subsidies for religious or anti-religious activity. The government must remain "religion neutral," even if our elected officials make decisions based on personal moral values. Freedom of the press requires an independent and non-intimidated media that maintains objectivity and reports facts without bias towards the interests of government officials.
Protect the Environment:
The organization that is the largest polluter in America is the government. The Department of Defense the Department of Energy and other state and federal agencies created the largest share of polluted sites in our nation. It is time that the government was required to obey they same environmental laws that corporations do. No longer should government be able to exclude itself from environmental legislation. The federal government pays to build roads into national forests so that contract loggers can remove the wood. These roads are expensive and are just another form of corporate welfare. Government mismanagement of national forests has lead to forest fire disasters and poor stewardship of our natural environment. The subsidies of oil and fossil fuel based transportation have lead to too much burning of fossil fuels and under-investment in alternative, clean energy sources such as solar and wind power. If we stop subsidizing oil, there will be an incentive in private industry to develop these other energy sources. With a record like this, how can we trust the government to protect the environment? Individual initiative, private, non-profit land trusts and local non-governmental organizations do a much better job. I encourage you to contribute to one and to preserve any natural areas you may own.
***********************************************************************************
As I read this list of issues and Mark’s positions on them, it became obvious to me that Mark has been consistent of the issues that I care about most during each of his campaigns regardless of which label he was wearing. Most importantly in 2006, Mark is the only candidate who can say he has been campaigning and standing up for these issues since 2002. While Aaron Dixon (Green Party Senate Candidate) stood on the sidelines and watched George Bush and Congress send us into Iraq, Mark filed and ran so that he could speak out against it. While former Slade Gorton Chief of Staff, Mike McGavick was ruling over the outsourcing of employees at Safeco while racking up huge profits in order to ensure a more significant golden parachute, Mark was campaigning against corporate abuses. Finally, as incumbent Senator Maria Cantwell was voting to give George Bush authority to send us to war and violate our civil liberties (twice now) and ship our jobs overseas via NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO, Mark has been speaking out about protecting our core values as Americans.
The only question that remains is whether Mark is a “viable” candidate.
Viable: “Capable of success or continuing effectiveness; practicable”
Oddly enough, the people who spend the most time asking this question are the very people who keep his name out of their newspapers and other venues where he might gain some traction. I would suggest that the real answer to that question lies with those who consider themselves progressive and are looking for someone to represent their values and stand up to the Bush Administration. The way I see it, we either stand with Mark today or we live with more of the same for the NEXT SIX YEARS. You decide.
Mark Wilson - Democrat for Senate
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
To me, the most important factor in deciding support for a candidate is where they stand on the issues that I most identify with. Because it is Mark’s association with the Libertarians that most concerns Democrats, I thought it would be useful to look for statements and positions Mark took in 2002. Yes I know that Mark gave some solidly Libertarian (and now infamous) responses to some questions to newspaper interviews during his 2002 campaign. He spoke of eliminating the capital gains tax and opposing a national healthcare plan (using the “tort reform” angle for containing costs). However, the fact that he has since recanted those positions seems to have been lost in the “fog of politics”. The fact is that, while those were the questions asked, they were not the major issues that Mark was running on. What follows is from the “Issues” page of Mark’s 2002 campaign website.
Slash Corporate Welfare:
One of the greatest injustices in our country today is when the tax money of hard working Americans finds its way into the bank accounts of for-profit corporations. It happens in a million ways; from tax write-offs for foreign advertising and oil exploration to outright payments to huge agricultural conglomerates. Often, these corporations won their special subsidies after making large campaign finance contributions. Let's call these what they really are: bribes. This is the largest corruption scandal of our times. Vote for Mark Wilson, who will make eliminating corporate welfare a top priority in Washington DC.
Legally Manage Marijuana:
The second greatest government perpetrated injustice of our time comes as a result of the honorable desire to reduce mind-altering drug use in America. Though a reduction in drug abuse would be a great benefit to our country, prohibition just does not work. Even worse, prohibition increases violence, creates disincentives to seek treatment, increases temptation and corruption of our police, and destroys civil liberties. Buying, selling or growing marijuana is, after all a non-violent act. Another cost to our society comes from the huge costs of incarceration. Over a quarter of the inmates of our countries prisons and jails were put there for non-violent drug offenses. This not only represents a huge financial burden on taxpayers, but destroys the lives and the productivity of the "offenders." Have you ever heard of anyone dying of marijuana abuse? The statistics show that it is far safer than alcohol. It is time to legally manage marijuana.
Repeal the USA Patriot Act:
Mark Wilson will also work to repeal the USA Patriot Act which nullifies our right to be free from warrentless search and seizure and allows the executive branch to violate our privacy without probable cause.
Prevent Terrorism:
Aren't the Saudis wealthy enough to pay for their own defense? The US's interests in stability in the Persian Gulf region primarily come from oil companies' desire to preserve their existing contracts and relationships there. But whoever owns the oil will want to sell it, if not to us, then to the world market from which we buy. Propping up an unpopular, undemocratic, totalitarian government because it is friendly to US oil interests is another form of corporate welfare as well as a violation of the principles of individual liberty that make America great. Bin Laden's primary reason for attacking on 9/11/01 was the presence of "infidel soldiers" in the land of Mecca and Medina. The Saudis should buy their own tanks and aircraft, and hire mercenaries if they need to. Though internal security of Israel is a just cause, involuntarily taxing anti-Israeli US citizens to support the military of Israel is immoral. Instead we should reduce income taxes and allow the friends of Israel in this country to solicit and send money voluntarily to help this worthy cause.
Enhance our National Defense and Security:
While we are at it, after we bring Bin Laden and his top lieutenants to justice, let's gradually bring nearly all our troops home, and deploy them in a defensive configuration on US soil. Let's use our electronic surveillance technology on satellites and in aircraft to keep tabs on foreign troop and missile deployment. Let's make much of that data available to the public of all nations. We will be able to enhance our national defense, reduce our profile as a target, improve our security and safety from international threats, further the spread of democracy and international sovereignty, increase international stability and reduce US defense spending all at the same time. We can keep our military all-volunteer and the best in the world, while spending more money per soldier (including increasing their pay) and save taxpayer money all at the same time through refocusing our military priorities on defense instead of offense.
Preserve Privacy:
The federal government is forcing drivers' license standards on the States that would make the drivers' license a de-facto national identification card. The requirement of showing "government issued ID" at the airport is another trend in that direction. Soon you may have to show your identification papers on demand of a government official at any time. Video surveillance cameras are now installed at most major intersections and on some public streets and sports venues. These are often connected to software that can "recognize" faces and read license plates. This can allow people to know your comings and goings around town and to know when you are not home. In the name of keeping track of health statistics, the government has acquired the right to all of your medical information that is on file with your doctor. Government employees do not need to get your signed permission, or even inform you that they have opened your file. Do you want strangers (or even acquaintances in your community) in government to know if you are taking estrogen or anti-depressants? So far, public libraries and bookstores have defended your right to privacy by refusing to divulge lists of books you have checked out or bought, even if you are not under suspicion of having committed any crime. But the government is working to gain access to this information. Without a sense of privacy, people will fear getting the knowledge and information they need to fight entrenched interests that are contrary to the public good. The government has fought your right to use encryption software for your use of the internet and has reserved special "keys" so that it can read your e-mail without a warrant. Does this concern you even a little bit? What if this trend continues? Mark Wilson will defend your right to privacy in Congress.
Get Government out of Marriage:
Marriage is that most beautiful of contracts between individuals to love and be faithful. This contract is voluntarily chosen and negotiated. Any two individuals should be free to enter in to this kind of contract. The government has no business regulating who may or may not enter in to these kinds of agreements. Gays and lesbians must be free to marry anyone they choose. Tax laws must not discriminate against either married or single people. Furthermore, the rights of any two consenting adults to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own bedrooms must be preserved. Archaic and backward laws to the contrary must be repealed.
Preserve Freedom of Speech, Religion and of the Press:
Freedom of speech requires that the government not engage in censorship. Freedom of religion requires that the government not create any advantages or disadvantages for any particular religion in our society and no special subsidies for religious or anti-religious activity. The government must remain "religion neutral," even if our elected officials make decisions based on personal moral values. Freedom of the press requires an independent and non-intimidated media that maintains objectivity and reports facts without bias towards the interests of government officials.
Protect the Environment:
The organization that is the largest polluter in America is the government. The Department of Defense the Department of Energy and other state and federal agencies created the largest share of polluted sites in our nation. It is time that the government was required to obey they same environmental laws that corporations do. No longer should government be able to exclude itself from environmental legislation. The federal government pays to build roads into national forests so that contract loggers can remove the wood. These roads are expensive and are just another form of corporate welfare. Government mismanagement of national forests has lead to forest fire disasters and poor stewardship of our natural environment. The subsidies of oil and fossil fuel based transportation have lead to too much burning of fossil fuels and under-investment in alternative, clean energy sources such as solar and wind power. If we stop subsidizing oil, there will be an incentive in private industry to develop these other energy sources. With a record like this, how can we trust the government to protect the environment? Individual initiative, private, non-profit land trusts and local non-governmental organizations do a much better job. I encourage you to contribute to one and to preserve any natural areas you may own.
***********************************************************************************
As I read this list of issues and Mark’s positions on them, it became obvious to me that Mark has been consistent of the issues that I care about most during each of his campaigns regardless of which label he was wearing. Most importantly in 2006, Mark is the only candidate who can say he has been campaigning and standing up for these issues since 2002. While Aaron Dixon (Green Party Senate Candidate) stood on the sidelines and watched George Bush and Congress send us into Iraq, Mark filed and ran so that he could speak out against it. While former Slade Gorton Chief of Staff, Mike McGavick was ruling over the outsourcing of employees at Safeco while racking up huge profits in order to ensure a more significant golden parachute, Mark was campaigning against corporate abuses. Finally, as incumbent Senator Maria Cantwell was voting to give George Bush authority to send us to war and violate our civil liberties (twice now) and ship our jobs overseas via NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO, Mark has been speaking out about protecting our core values as Americans.
The only question that remains is whether Mark is a “viable” candidate.
Viable: “Capable of success or continuing effectiveness; practicable”
Oddly enough, the people who spend the most time asking this question are the very people who keep his name out of their newspapers and other venues where he might gain some traction. I would suggest that the real answer to that question lies with those who consider themselves progressive and are looking for someone to represent their values and stand up to the Bush Administration. The way I see it, we either stand with Mark today or we live with more of the same for the NEXT SIX YEARS. You decide.
Mark Wilson - Democrat for Senate
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/25/06
Americans Killed: 2322
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,895
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Pfc. Amy A. Duerksen, 19, of Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on March 11.
*Spc. Antoine J. McKinzie, 25, of Indianapolis, Ind., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on March 21.
*Staff Sgt. Brock A. Beery, 30, of White House, Tenn., died in Habbaniyah, Iraq on March 23.
*Sgt 1st Class Randy D. McCaulley, 44, Indiana, Pa., died in Habbaniyah, Iraq on March 23.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2322
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,895
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Pfc. Amy A. Duerksen, 19, of Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on March 11.
*Spc. Antoine J. McKinzie, 25, of Indianapolis, Ind., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on March 21.
*Staff Sgt. Brock A. Beery, 30, of White House, Tenn., died in Habbaniyah, Iraq on March 23.
*Sgt 1st Class Randy D. McCaulley, 44, Indiana, Pa., died in Habbaniyah, Iraq on March 23.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
My country, tis of thee
Sweet Land of Liberty
Of thee, I sing.......
New Scrutiny for Law on Detaining Witnesses
By ADAM LIPTAK
March 22, 2006
New York Times
..."Mr. (Abdullah) al Kidd, who was known as Lavoni T. Kidd before he converted to Islam, spent 16 days in detention in three states in 2003, some of it shackled hand and foot. That was followed by 14 months under court supervision. Mr. al Kidd was not charged with a crime, and he was not called to testify, though a government affidavit said he had information "crucial to the prosecution" of another man."...
In recent weeks the revelations of illegal NSA wiretaps on American citizens (authorized by George W. Bush) have captivated some and even led a US Senator to offer a resolution of censure against Mr. Bush. Over the same period of time we have seen a new Supreme Court Justice who espouses a "theory of Unitarian Executive" rubber stamped to the Court as well as a renewal of the USA Patriot Act. The story of Mr. Kidd, just one of an unknown number, only adds to my deep concerns about the very meaning of civil liberties in the United States.
According to the article by Mr. Liptak, "A 22-year-old federal law that allows people to be held without charges if they have information about others' crimes is coming under fresh scrutiny in the courts, in Congress and within the Justice Department after reports that it has been abused in terrorism investigations. The law allows so-called material witnesses to be held long enough to secure their testimony if there is reason to think they will flee."
A couple of pieces of relevant information:
Amendment IV - Search and seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
************************************************************************************
Amendment V - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
************************************************************************************
Apparently I am not the only one with questions of the constitutionality of these detentions. "A bill introduced by Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, would curtail the use of the material witness law to hold people suspected of plotting terrorist acts.
Representative Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, said he would introduce similar legislation in the House. "It's being stretched beyond its original purpose," Mr. Flake said of the material witness law. "Individuals are being indefinitely detained who might be suspects. If that's the case, they need to be charged."" However, in true Post-9-11 fashion, "Mr. Flake added that he might be receptive to arguments that federal prosecutors need tools to hold some people they consider dangerous. "If you need something else," he said, "come to us."".
Then, of course, we come to the total secrecy of the program. "The use of material witness warrants in terrorism investigations continues to be shrouded in secrecy. In May 2003, the Justice Department told Congress that fewer than 50 people had been detained as material witnesses "in the course of the Sept. 11 investigation." About half were held for more than 30 days, the department said. A department spokesman did not respond to requests for more current numbers. The department has for three years refused to give Congress fresher data on material witness detentions in terrorism investigations. (emphasis added- TLS) "They claim that they can't even tell us how many people they have detained" because of court sealing orders and grand jury secrecy rules, said Julie Katzman, a lawyer on Senator Leahy's staff.
As to Senator Leahy's legislation: "The proposed legislation would place strict time limits on detentions — 10 days for grand jury investigations and 30 days for trials — and allow them only where there is clear and convincing evidence that the witness is a flight risk." This would be good until you read what, up to now, has been accepted as "clear and convincing evidence."
Back to the story about Mr. Kidd: "Magistrate Judge Mikel H. Williams of the Federal District Court in Boise, Idaho, authorized the arrest, based on an affidavit from Special Agent Scott Mace of the F.B.I. "Kidd is scheduled to take a one-way, first-class flight (costing about $5,000)," the affidavit said.
That statement was false in every particular (emphasis added -TLS): the ticket was for a round trip, in coach, costing $1,700."
For those who will say, "If you have nothing to hide, why do you care?" I will leave you with this other piece of relevant stuff:
First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
**********************************************************************************
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Of thee, I sing.......
New Scrutiny for Law on Detaining Witnesses
By ADAM LIPTAK
March 22, 2006
New York Times
..."Mr. (Abdullah) al Kidd, who was known as Lavoni T. Kidd before he converted to Islam, spent 16 days in detention in three states in 2003, some of it shackled hand and foot. That was followed by 14 months under court supervision. Mr. al Kidd was not charged with a crime, and he was not called to testify, though a government affidavit said he had information "crucial to the prosecution" of another man."...
In recent weeks the revelations of illegal NSA wiretaps on American citizens (authorized by George W. Bush) have captivated some and even led a US Senator to offer a resolution of censure against Mr. Bush. Over the same period of time we have seen a new Supreme Court Justice who espouses a "theory of Unitarian Executive" rubber stamped to the Court as well as a renewal of the USA Patriot Act. The story of Mr. Kidd, just one of an unknown number, only adds to my deep concerns about the very meaning of civil liberties in the United States.
According to the article by Mr. Liptak, "A 22-year-old federal law that allows people to be held without charges if they have information about others' crimes is coming under fresh scrutiny in the courts, in Congress and within the Justice Department after reports that it has been abused in terrorism investigations. The law allows so-called material witnesses to be held long enough to secure their testimony if there is reason to think they will flee."
A couple of pieces of relevant information:
Amendment IV - Search and seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
************************************************************************************
Amendment V - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
************************************************************************************
Apparently I am not the only one with questions of the constitutionality of these detentions. "A bill introduced by Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, would curtail the use of the material witness law to hold people suspected of plotting terrorist acts.
Representative Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, said he would introduce similar legislation in the House. "It's being stretched beyond its original purpose," Mr. Flake said of the material witness law. "Individuals are being indefinitely detained who might be suspects. If that's the case, they need to be charged."" However, in true Post-9-11 fashion, "Mr. Flake added that he might be receptive to arguments that federal prosecutors need tools to hold some people they consider dangerous. "If you need something else," he said, "come to us."".
Then, of course, we come to the total secrecy of the program. "The use of material witness warrants in terrorism investigations continues to be shrouded in secrecy. In May 2003, the Justice Department told Congress that fewer than 50 people had been detained as material witnesses "in the course of the Sept. 11 investigation." About half were held for more than 30 days, the department said. A department spokesman did not respond to requests for more current numbers. The department has for three years refused to give Congress fresher data on material witness detentions in terrorism investigations. (emphasis added- TLS) "They claim that they can't even tell us how many people they have detained" because of court sealing orders and grand jury secrecy rules, said Julie Katzman, a lawyer on Senator Leahy's staff.
As to Senator Leahy's legislation: "The proposed legislation would place strict time limits on detentions — 10 days for grand jury investigations and 30 days for trials — and allow them only where there is clear and convincing evidence that the witness is a flight risk." This would be good until you read what, up to now, has been accepted as "clear and convincing evidence."
Back to the story about Mr. Kidd: "Magistrate Judge Mikel H. Williams of the Federal District Court in Boise, Idaho, authorized the arrest, based on an affidavit from Special Agent Scott Mace of the F.B.I. "Kidd is scheduled to take a one-way, first-class flight (costing about $5,000)," the affidavit said.
That statement was false in every particular (emphasis added -TLS): the ticket was for a round trip, in coach, costing $1,700."
For those who will say, "If you have nothing to hide, why do you care?" I will leave you with this other piece of relevant stuff:
First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
**********************************************************************************
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/22/06
Americans Killed: 2319
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,832
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Sgt. Amanda N. Pinson, 21, of St. Louis, Mo. died in Tikrit, Iraq, on Mar. 16
*Spc. Carlos M. Gonzalez, 22, of Middletown, N.Y. died in Tikrit, Iraq, on Mar. 16
*Cpl. Nyle Yates III, 22, of Lake Odessa, Mich., died in Bayji, Iraq, on Mar. 16.
*Staff Sgt. Ricardo Barraza, 24, of Shafter, Calif. died in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, on March 18.
*Sgt. Dale G. Brehm, 23, of Turlock, Calif. died in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, on March 18.
**********************************************************************************
Bush Says U.S. Troops Will Stay in Iraq Past '08
Story here
"Asked if a day will come when there are no U.S. troops there, Bush said "that will be decided by future presidents and future governments of Iraq.""
***********************************************************************************
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2319
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,832
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Sgt. Amanda N. Pinson, 21, of St. Louis, Mo. died in Tikrit, Iraq, on Mar. 16
*Spc. Carlos M. Gonzalez, 22, of Middletown, N.Y. died in Tikrit, Iraq, on Mar. 16
*Cpl. Nyle Yates III, 22, of Lake Odessa, Mich., died in Bayji, Iraq, on Mar. 16.
*Staff Sgt. Ricardo Barraza, 24, of Shafter, Calif. died in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, on March 18.
*Sgt. Dale G. Brehm, 23, of Turlock, Calif. died in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, on March 18.
**********************************************************************************
Bush Says U.S. Troops Will Stay in Iraq Past '08
Story here
"Asked if a day will come when there are no U.S. troops there, Bush said "that will be decided by future presidents and future governments of Iraq.""
***********************************************************************************
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Sunday, March 19, 2006
IWR News - 3rd Anniversary
Iraq Body Count: 3/19/06
Americans Killed: 2318
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,795
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Sgt. Corey A. Dan, 22, of Norway, Maine died near Ar Ramadi, Iraq on March 13.
*Staff Sgt. Marco, A. Silva, 27, of Alva, Fla. died near Ar Ramadi, Iraq on March 13.
*Pfc. Angelo A. Zawaydeh, 19, of San Bruno, Calif., died in Baghdad, Iraq on March 15.
********************************************************************************
The American faces of Bush's war:
Here
Other images of Bush's war:
Here
Peace (If we want it),
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2318
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,795
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Sgt. Corey A. Dan, 22, of Norway, Maine died near Ar Ramadi, Iraq on March 13.
*Staff Sgt. Marco, A. Silva, 27, of Alva, Fla. died near Ar Ramadi, Iraq on March 13.
*Pfc. Angelo A. Zawaydeh, 19, of San Bruno, Calif., died in Baghdad, Iraq on March 15.
********************************************************************************
The American faces of Bush's war:
Here
Other images of Bush's war:
Here
Peace (If we want it),
Chad (The Left) Shue
Friday, March 17, 2006
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/17/06
Americans Killed: 2314
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,754
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Staff Sgt. Bryan A. Lewis, 32, of Bunkie, La., died north of Rustamiyah, Iraq, on March 13.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2314
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,754
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Staff Sgt. Bryan A. Lewis, 32, of Bunkie, La., died north of Rustamiyah, Iraq, on March 13.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Thursday, March 16, 2006
House OKs $92B for wars
WASHINGTON: The House voted overwhelmingly on Thursday to give President Bush $92 billion more for Iraq and Gulf Coast hurricane relief, despite bipartisan worries about the ballooning costs of the war and the recovery effort. The bulk of the bill, $67.6 billion, would pay for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On a 348-71 vote, Republicans and Democrats joined to support the measure, eager to vote to back troops in the field and help hurricane reconstruction eight months before a congressional election - even at a time of massive budget shortfalls. (*From the Washington State House Delegation, only McDermott and Inslee voted "Nay") tls
Several anti-war Democrats objected.(*See the list of members voting "Nay" below) tls "Not one more dime for this administration's ill-conceived, ill-advised, misguided and failed Iraq policy," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.
AP-Ipsos polling in early March showed that about four in 10 Americans supported the president's handling of Iraq, his efforts on foreign policy and terrorism, and his handling of the hurricane recovery. (*That would be six in ten who do not support anything to do with George W. Bush) tls. Despite such widespread public dissatisfaction, lawmakers from both parties backed the measure. Opposing it would invite election-year criticism for Republicans and Democrats alike that they were shortchanging troops at war or abandoning hurricane victims. "Everybody supports the troops and everyone knows that as long as they're there, we're going to give them what they need," said Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash. "I just regret that we have to pass this (debt) on to future generations." (* Regrets and $67 Billion would buy allot of healthcare) tls.
The Senate plans to complete its version of the measure this spring. Congress is to send a final bill to the president's desk shortly thereafter.
Friends,
An overwhelming majority of the American people are ready for this misadventure to end. 25% of the troops are ready to come home today and another 50% say they should come home by the end of the year. There is still time to make a difference here. Write, fax, phone your Senator and tell them to oppose any further funding unless it is allocated specifically for the support and safety of our troops to be re-deployed out of Iraq. It is not too late in the House either. By specifying the re-deployment of our troops, the Senate version would have to go back to the House for reconciliation.
By the way, after you contact your senator, reach out to these 71 bipartisan members of the US House and thank them for standing up for peace and principle.
Abercrombie, Baldwin, Blackburn (R), Blumenauer, Campbell (CA)(R), Cannon (R), Capps, Clay, Coble (R), Conyers, Cooper, Costello, Cubin (R), Deal (GA) (R), Eshoo, Farr, Flake (R), Frank (MA), Gohmert (R), Grijalva, Gutierrez, Hensarling (R), Hinchey, Holt, Inslee, Jackson-Lee (TX), Johnson, Sam (R), King (IA) (R), Kucinich, Lee, Lewis (GA), Maloney, Markey, McCollum (MN), McDermott, McGovern, McHenry (R), McKinney, McNulty, Meehan, Michaud, Miller, George, Moore (WI), Neal (MA), Neugebauer (R), Olver, Owens, Pallone, Paul (R), Payne, Pence (R), Petri (R), Rangel, Rothman, Schakowsky, Sensenbrenner (R), Serrano, Solis, Stark, Tancredo (R), Thompson (CA), Tierney, Velázquez, Waters, Watson, Watt, Waxman, Weiner, Westmoreland (R), Woolsey, Wu
How many more have to die to save Norm Dick's from having to pass debt on to our children and grandchildren?
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
On a 348-71 vote, Republicans and Democrats joined to support the measure, eager to vote to back troops in the field and help hurricane reconstruction eight months before a congressional election - even at a time of massive budget shortfalls. (*From the Washington State House Delegation, only McDermott and Inslee voted "Nay") tls
Several anti-war Democrats objected.(*See the list of members voting "Nay" below) tls "Not one more dime for this administration's ill-conceived, ill-advised, misguided and failed Iraq policy," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.
AP-Ipsos polling in early March showed that about four in 10 Americans supported the president's handling of Iraq, his efforts on foreign policy and terrorism, and his handling of the hurricane recovery. (*That would be six in ten who do not support anything to do with George W. Bush) tls. Despite such widespread public dissatisfaction, lawmakers from both parties backed the measure. Opposing it would invite election-year criticism for Republicans and Democrats alike that they were shortchanging troops at war or abandoning hurricane victims. "Everybody supports the troops and everyone knows that as long as they're there, we're going to give them what they need," said Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash. "I just regret that we have to pass this (debt) on to future generations." (* Regrets and $67 Billion would buy allot of healthcare) tls.
The Senate plans to complete its version of the measure this spring. Congress is to send a final bill to the president's desk shortly thereafter.
Friends,
An overwhelming majority of the American people are ready for this misadventure to end. 25% of the troops are ready to come home today and another 50% say they should come home by the end of the year. There is still time to make a difference here. Write, fax, phone your Senator and tell them to oppose any further funding unless it is allocated specifically for the support and safety of our troops to be re-deployed out of Iraq. It is not too late in the House either. By specifying the re-deployment of our troops, the Senate version would have to go back to the House for reconciliation.
By the way, after you contact your senator, reach out to these 71 bipartisan members of the US House and thank them for standing up for peace and principle.
Abercrombie, Baldwin, Blackburn (R), Blumenauer, Campbell (CA)(R), Cannon (R), Capps, Clay, Coble (R), Conyers, Cooper, Costello, Cubin (R), Deal (GA) (R), Eshoo, Farr, Flake (R), Frank (MA), Gohmert (R), Grijalva, Gutierrez, Hensarling (R), Hinchey, Holt, Inslee, Jackson-Lee (TX), Johnson, Sam (R), King (IA) (R), Kucinich, Lee, Lewis (GA), Maloney, Markey, McCollum (MN), McDermott, McGovern, McHenry (R), McKinney, McNulty, Meehan, Michaud, Miller, George, Moore (WI), Neal (MA), Neugebauer (R), Olver, Owens, Pallone, Paul (R), Payne, Pence (R), Petri (R), Rangel, Rothman, Schakowsky, Sensenbrenner (R), Serrano, Solis, Stark, Tancredo (R), Thompson (CA), Tierney, Velázquez, Waters, Watson, Watt, Waxman, Weiner, Westmoreland (R), Woolsey, Wu
How many more have to die to save Norm Dick's from having to pass debt on to our children and grandchildren?
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/15/06
Americans Killed: 2311
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,754
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Lance Cpl. Kristen K. Figueroa, 20, of Honolulu, Hawaii, died March 12 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2311
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,754
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Lance Cpl. Kristen K. Figueroa, 20, of Honolulu, Hawaii, died March 12 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/14/06
Americans Killed: 2309
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,754
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Lance Cpl. Bunny Long, 22, of Modesto, Calif., died March 10 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2309
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,754
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Lance Cpl. Bunny Long, 22, of Modesto, Calif., died March 10 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Monday, March 13, 2006
And Today's News From the Democrats is.........
"Nothing new here."
Feingold draws little support for censure
By LAURIE KELLMAN
Associated Press Writer
Monday, March 13, 2006
WASHINGTON — Democrats distanced themselves Monday from Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold's effort to censure President Bush over domestic spying, preventing a floor vote that could alienate swing voters....
...Republicans dared Democrats to vote for the proposal....
..."A formal censure by Congress is an appropriate and responsible first step to assure the public that when the president thinks he can violate the law without consequences, Congress has the will to hold him accountable," Feingold said.
Even as he spoke, Democratic leaders held off the immediate vote that Majority Leader Bill Frist requested....
...The referral averted a debate and a vote that Democrats privately worried would alienate voters who could decide close elections.
Throughout the day, Feingold's fellow Democrats said they understood his frustration but they held back overt support for the resolution....
...Feingold's resolution accuses Bush of violating the Constitution and the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
It reads in part:
"Resolved that the United States Senate does hereby censure George W. Bush, president of the United States, and does condemn his unlawful authorization of wiretaps of Americans within the United States without obtaining the court orders required."
The resolution says censuring Bush also is warranted by "his failure to inform the full congressional intelligence committees as required by law, and his efforts to mislead the American people about the authorities relied upon by his administration to conduct wiretaps and about the legality of the program."
*********************************************************************************
Apparently, what we have here is another case of grandstanding by a a rogue operator who does not understand "The Way It's Done."
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Feingold draws little support for censure
By LAURIE KELLMAN
Associated Press Writer
Monday, March 13, 2006
WASHINGTON — Democrats distanced themselves Monday from Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold's effort to censure President Bush over domestic spying, preventing a floor vote that could alienate swing voters....
...Republicans dared Democrats to vote for the proposal....
..."A formal censure by Congress is an appropriate and responsible first step to assure the public that when the president thinks he can violate the law without consequences, Congress has the will to hold him accountable," Feingold said.
Even as he spoke, Democratic leaders held off the immediate vote that Majority Leader Bill Frist requested....
...The referral averted a debate and a vote that Democrats privately worried would alienate voters who could decide close elections.
Throughout the day, Feingold's fellow Democrats said they understood his frustration but they held back overt support for the resolution....
...Feingold's resolution accuses Bush of violating the Constitution and the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
It reads in part:
"Resolved that the United States Senate does hereby censure George W. Bush, president of the United States, and does condemn his unlawful authorization of wiretaps of Americans within the United States without obtaining the court orders required."
The resolution says censuring Bush also is warranted by "his failure to inform the full congressional intelligence committees as required by law, and his efforts to mislead the American people about the authorities relied upon by his administration to conduct wiretaps and about the legality of the program."
*********************************************************************************
Apparently, what we have here is another case of grandstanding by a a rogue operator who does not understand "The Way It's Done."
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Saturday, March 11, 2006
Civil War?
Is there a civil war taking place in the Democratic Party? Oh sure there is always talk about which element of the party is going to come out ahead after the various caucuses or primaries but it seems to me that there is something much more happening across the country (and right here at home) right now; a genuine struggle for the reigns of power within the party.
During the 2004 primary, the DLC came out swinging at former Vermont governor Howard Dean as soon as he started to pick up momentum. By challenging the new "centrist Democrats" who had been willing participants to the newly appointed Bush Administration's economic, environmental, and educational "reforms" and who, on the heels of 9-11, had actually written key pieces of the USA Patriot Act and the irresponsible Iraq Use of Force (War) Resolution, Dean set himself up as the anti-DLC candidate. Soon the sides were drawn with Dean, Kucinich, Sharpton, and Mosely-Braun to the left and Lieberman, Kerry, Edwards, and Gephardt to the right (leaving Bob Graham of Florida representing the true center). The ensuing debate centered not on the merits of the issues and plans but more on which candidate would sell better to middle America in "time of war". The mantra from the DLC was "America will not accept a return to Liberal anti-war candidates in the new post 9-11 era." The fact that they were actually allowing Karl Rove to set their agenda by claiming "We want Dean" in an effort to cast doubt on Dean's electability, barely entered into the conversation.
Progressives, who were still reeling from the 2000 election and were having some genuine identity issues over the Clinton years**, began to question their own convictions and started to peel away from Dean and the rest (ok, not so much from the rest) and fall into line with the "Party Leadership" who insisted that we should support "electable Democrats until we can reclaim the majority in Congress and set the stage for more Progressive candidates." By the time of the Iowa caucuses, the seeds of doubt had grown into a field of shattered dreams and launched the campaign of our "War candidate" to match up with their "War president." In Washington State, we had the added feature of watching our more Progressive senior senator and members of congress reclaim their seats rather handily and a significant Democratic pick-up in the state legislature (led by a solidly Progressive movement) while our governor's race was a real nail biter. I am certainly not alone in believing that race was kept close due mostly to the reluctance of our Democratic candidate to take any firm stands on issues that might hint that she leaned even slightly left. In the end, she eked out a victory and early indications are that Gov. Gregoire will govern effectively so long as she maintains a Democratic majority.
In 2006, we have battle lines being drawn all over the country. From Pennsylvania, where the party of civil rights and a woman's right to choose, is promoting an anti-choice candidate for US Senate over a pro-choice Democratic activist with major Progressive backing. In Illinois, the DCCC is casting aside the DFA endorsed candidate who garnered 40% against entrenched republican Henry Hyde (of Clinton Impeachment fame) and promoting an out of district Iraq Invasion Veteran with virtually unknown stands on the issues. Right here in Washington State we have the "invisible Democratic senate primary" between the incumbent, Maria Cantwell who voted for the Patriot Act -twice now- and the IWR (one of the very people Howard Dean was talking about in 2003/2004) and Marine Corp. Veteran for Peace, Mark Wilson whose crime against the Democratic Party is his former affiliations with the Libertarians and the Greens. What is the "party line" in all of these races? You guessed it: Progressives should support "electable Democrats until we can reclaim the majority in Congress and set the stage for more Progressive candidates." The argument doesn't appear to be holding well this time around.
Progressive groups from Move-on.org, to True Majority, to Progressive Democrats of America along with Progressive pundits and bloggers like Molly Ivins, Jim Hightower, and William Rivers Pitt are standing firm against the status-quo, calling for courage in the Democratic Party; demanding that they promote candidates who will stand up to the neocons. Why the urgency? How the Progressives fair in 2006 may well define our position in the 2008 race for the Whitehouse. By standing solidly behind our values and the candidates who represent them, we will send the message to the party that we will not settle for a presidential candidate who has failed to defend our values every time they had the chance. If we walk away this year, we might as well "phone it in" in 2008.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
**Bill Clinton is an enigma to Progressive Democrats. On one hand we have a master politician who was able to overcome the most negative attacks in recent history and serve two terms (a feat unknown to a Democrat since FDR). His rhetoric on social issues earned him the honorary title of "The First Black President" However, on closer examination, Clinton's rhetoric was much more powerful than his actions. From "Don't ask, don't tell" to "Welfare Reform" social programs actually stood still at best and even declined in some cases. It should never escape the memories of Progressives that it was Clinton who gave us NAFTA and the WTO and many are still struggling to justify Bosnia and 8 years of sanctions and bombing in Iraq with the call for the heads of the current neocon war mongers. He gets much credit for the great economy of the 90s, yet the argument can be made that he was simply the beneficiary of the dot-com boom and was able to move on just ahead of the dot-com bust.
During the 2004 primary, the DLC came out swinging at former Vermont governor Howard Dean as soon as he started to pick up momentum. By challenging the new "centrist Democrats" who had been willing participants to the newly appointed Bush Administration's economic, environmental, and educational "reforms" and who, on the heels of 9-11, had actually written key pieces of the USA Patriot Act and the irresponsible Iraq Use of Force (War) Resolution, Dean set himself up as the anti-DLC candidate. Soon the sides were drawn with Dean, Kucinich, Sharpton, and Mosely-Braun to the left and Lieberman, Kerry, Edwards, and Gephardt to the right (leaving Bob Graham of Florida representing the true center). The ensuing debate centered not on the merits of the issues and plans but more on which candidate would sell better to middle America in "time of war". The mantra from the DLC was "America will not accept a return to Liberal anti-war candidates in the new post 9-11 era." The fact that they were actually allowing Karl Rove to set their agenda by claiming "We want Dean" in an effort to cast doubt on Dean's electability, barely entered into the conversation.
Progressives, who were still reeling from the 2000 election and were having some genuine identity issues over the Clinton years**, began to question their own convictions and started to peel away from Dean and the rest (ok, not so much from the rest) and fall into line with the "Party Leadership" who insisted that we should support "electable Democrats until we can reclaim the majority in Congress and set the stage for more Progressive candidates." By the time of the Iowa caucuses, the seeds of doubt had grown into a field of shattered dreams and launched the campaign of our "War candidate" to match up with their "War president." In Washington State, we had the added feature of watching our more Progressive senior senator and members of congress reclaim their seats rather handily and a significant Democratic pick-up in the state legislature (led by a solidly Progressive movement) while our governor's race was a real nail biter. I am certainly not alone in believing that race was kept close due mostly to the reluctance of our Democratic candidate to take any firm stands on issues that might hint that she leaned even slightly left. In the end, she eked out a victory and early indications are that Gov. Gregoire will govern effectively so long as she maintains a Democratic majority.
In 2006, we have battle lines being drawn all over the country. From Pennsylvania, where the party of civil rights and a woman's right to choose, is promoting an anti-choice candidate for US Senate over a pro-choice Democratic activist with major Progressive backing. In Illinois, the DCCC is casting aside the DFA endorsed candidate who garnered 40% against entrenched republican Henry Hyde (of Clinton Impeachment fame) and promoting an out of district Iraq Invasion Veteran with virtually unknown stands on the issues. Right here in Washington State we have the "invisible Democratic senate primary" between the incumbent, Maria Cantwell who voted for the Patriot Act -twice now- and the IWR (one of the very people Howard Dean was talking about in 2003/2004) and Marine Corp. Veteran for Peace, Mark Wilson whose crime against the Democratic Party is his former affiliations with the Libertarians and the Greens. What is the "party line" in all of these races? You guessed it: Progressives should support "electable Democrats until we can reclaim the majority in Congress and set the stage for more Progressive candidates." The argument doesn't appear to be holding well this time around.
Progressive groups from Move-on.org, to True Majority, to Progressive Democrats of America along with Progressive pundits and bloggers like Molly Ivins, Jim Hightower, and William Rivers Pitt are standing firm against the status-quo, calling for courage in the Democratic Party; demanding that they promote candidates who will stand up to the neocons. Why the urgency? How the Progressives fair in 2006 may well define our position in the 2008 race for the Whitehouse. By standing solidly behind our values and the candidates who represent them, we will send the message to the party that we will not settle for a presidential candidate who has failed to defend our values every time they had the chance. If we walk away this year, we might as well "phone it in" in 2008.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
**Bill Clinton is an enigma to Progressive Democrats. On one hand we have a master politician who was able to overcome the most negative attacks in recent history and serve two terms (a feat unknown to a Democrat since FDR). His rhetoric on social issues earned him the honorary title of "The First Black President" However, on closer examination, Clinton's rhetoric was much more powerful than his actions. From "Don't ask, don't tell" to "Welfare Reform" social programs actually stood still at best and even declined in some cases. It should never escape the memories of Progressives that it was Clinton who gave us NAFTA and the WTO and many are still struggling to justify Bosnia and 8 years of sanctions and bombing in Iraq with the call for the heads of the current neocon war mongers. He gets much credit for the great economy of the 90s, yet the argument can be made that he was simply the beneficiary of the dot-com boom and was able to move on just ahead of the dot-com bust.
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/11/06
Americans Killed: 2307
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,589
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Gunnery Sgt. Justin R. Martone, 31, of Bedford, Va. died March 7 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
*Gunnery Sgt. John D. Fry, 28, of Lorena, Texas died March 8 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
*Cpl. Adam O. Zanutto, 26, of Caliente, Calif., died March 6 at National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Md., from wounds received as a result of an improvised explosive device in Al Anbar province, Iraq on Feb. 25.
*Pfc. Ricky Salas, Jr. 22, of Roswell, N.M., died in Mosul, Iraq, on March 7
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2307
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,589
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Gunnery Sgt. Justin R. Martone, 31, of Bedford, Va. died March 7 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
*Gunnery Sgt. John D. Fry, 28, of Lorena, Texas died March 8 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
*Cpl. Adam O. Zanutto, 26, of Caliente, Calif., died March 6 at National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Md., from wounds received as a result of an improvised explosive device in Al Anbar province, Iraq on Feb. 25.
*Pfc. Ricky Salas, Jr. 22, of Roswell, N.M., died in Mosul, Iraq, on March 7
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Mushroom Cloud Condi Watch
As a new recurring feature of the The Left Shue, here is today's installment of Mushroom Cloud Condi:
US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice says that no country poses a greater challenge to America now than Iran.
"We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran, whose policies are directed at developing a Middle East that would be 180 degrees different than the Middle East that we would like to see developed," she said.
Dr Rice also says Iran is determined to develop a nuclear weapon in defiance of the international community.
"This is a country that it seems is determined to develop a nuclear weapon in defiance of the international community that is determined that they should not get one," she said.
"It is a country that is the central banker for terrorism, whether that terrorism is in southern Iraq or in the Palestinian territories or in Lebanon."
Iran says it will develop its nuclear capacity, regardless of possible sanctions.
Its regime has warned sanctions may cause pain and harm for the West.
The US is refusing to rule out military action against Iran.
Gosh, didn't see that coming..........
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice says that no country poses a greater challenge to America now than Iran.
"We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran, whose policies are directed at developing a Middle East that would be 180 degrees different than the Middle East that we would like to see developed," she said.
Dr Rice also says Iran is determined to develop a nuclear weapon in defiance of the international community.
"This is a country that it seems is determined to develop a nuclear weapon in defiance of the international community that is determined that they should not get one," she said.
"It is a country that is the central banker for terrorism, whether that terrorism is in southern Iraq or in the Palestinian territories or in Lebanon."
Iran says it will develop its nuclear capacity, regardless of possible sanctions.
Its regime has warned sanctions may cause pain and harm for the West.
The US is refusing to rule out military action against Iran.
Gosh, didn't see that coming..........
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/09/06
Americans Killed: 2305
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,589
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Staff Sgt. Dwayne P. R. Lewis, 26, of New York City, died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 27.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2305
Americans Wounded: 17,004
Iraqi Dead: Est.:37,589
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Staff Sgt. Dwayne P. R. Lewis, 26, of New York City, died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 27.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
Congressman Larsen Set the Record Straight
Friends, I am pleased to pass along the following information from Congressman Rick Larsen of Washington's 2nd CD. Rick clarifies the vote that took place yesterday on the Patriot Act.
************************************************************************************
To My Constituents in the 2nd CD:
The press has done a horrible job reporting yesterday's vote on the Patriot Act. The House of Representatives voted last December on the Patriot Act. I voted NO. The US Senate voted on the Patriot Act on March 2nd, Senator Murray voted NO and Senator Cantwell voted YES. Yesterday, the Senate passed an amendment to the Patriot Act that made some very small improvements in the law, I did vote YES on that because I will do every thing possible to fix or eliminate unconstitutional provisions of the Act that passed.
Sincerely,
Rick Larsen
Member of Congress
Washington, 2nd CD
************************************************************************************
The following is the summary of what was actually voted on yesterday:
*********************************************************************************
SUMMARY AS OF:
2/10/2006--Introduced.
USA PATRIOT Act Additional Reauthorizing Amendments Act of 2006 - Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to allow a person receiving a production order (an order from the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or his designee (Director) to produce any tangible thing, such as a book, document, or record) to challenge its legality by filing a petition with a pool of three district court judges established by the Chief Justice of the United States for such purpose. Permits the filing of a petition, no sooner than one year after issuance of the production order, challenging any accompanying nondisclosure order (an order prohibiting the person receiving the production order from disclosing that the FBI sought information).
Requires the presiding judge of the pool to immediately assign a judge to conduct an initial review of a petition. Requires such judge, within 72 hours of the assignment, to make a determination. Requires the judge to immediately deny such petition if it is frivolous and affirm the production or nondisclosure order.
Permits any order setting aside a nondisclosure order to be stayed pending review upon request of the government. Permits setting aside a nondisclosure order if there is no reason to believe that national security would be endangered. Establishes as conclusive a certification by the Director or the Attorney General that the setting aside of a nondisclosure order may endanger national security, unless the certification was found to be made in bad faith.
Requires upholding a production order unless it is found to be unlawful. Requires immediate compliance with the production order if the judge does not set aside such order.
Grants the Supreme Court, upon writ of certiorari, jurisdiction to review a decision. Requires any judicial review to be as expeditious as possible and all petitions to be filed under seal. Requires any court proceedings, upon request from the government, to be ex parte and in camera.
Amends federal criminal law, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Right to Financial Privacy Act, and the National Security Act of 1947 to require a person making a disclosure to identify to the Director or requesting official the person to whom such disclosure will be made or was made prior to the request, but permits withholding the identity of an attorney to whom a disclosure was or will be made to obtain legal advice or assistance with respect to the request.
Considers a library not to be a wire or electronic service communication provider for purposes of granting national security letters, unless the library provides "electronic communication service."
***********************************************************************************
Finally, in reviewing the December vote in the House, the following House members also voted NO on final passage of the Patriot Act:
Baird, Dicks, Inslee, and Smith. McDermott did not vote.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
************************************************************************************
To My Constituents in the 2nd CD:
The press has done a horrible job reporting yesterday's vote on the Patriot Act. The House of Representatives voted last December on the Patriot Act. I voted NO. The US Senate voted on the Patriot Act on March 2nd, Senator Murray voted NO and Senator Cantwell voted YES. Yesterday, the Senate passed an amendment to the Patriot Act that made some very small improvements in the law, I did vote YES on that because I will do every thing possible to fix or eliminate unconstitutional provisions of the Act that passed.
Sincerely,
Rick Larsen
Member of Congress
Washington, 2nd CD
************************************************************************************
The following is the summary of what was actually voted on yesterday:
*********************************************************************************
SUMMARY AS OF:
2/10/2006--Introduced.
USA PATRIOT Act Additional Reauthorizing Amendments Act of 2006 - Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to allow a person receiving a production order (an order from the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or his designee (Director) to produce any tangible thing, such as a book, document, or record) to challenge its legality by filing a petition with a pool of three district court judges established by the Chief Justice of the United States for such purpose. Permits the filing of a petition, no sooner than one year after issuance of the production order, challenging any accompanying nondisclosure order (an order prohibiting the person receiving the production order from disclosing that the FBI sought information).
Requires the presiding judge of the pool to immediately assign a judge to conduct an initial review of a petition. Requires such judge, within 72 hours of the assignment, to make a determination. Requires the judge to immediately deny such petition if it is frivolous and affirm the production or nondisclosure order.
Permits any order setting aside a nondisclosure order to be stayed pending review upon request of the government. Permits setting aside a nondisclosure order if there is no reason to believe that national security would be endangered. Establishes as conclusive a certification by the Director or the Attorney General that the setting aside of a nondisclosure order may endanger national security, unless the certification was found to be made in bad faith.
Requires upholding a production order unless it is found to be unlawful. Requires immediate compliance with the production order if the judge does not set aside such order.
Grants the Supreme Court, upon writ of certiorari, jurisdiction to review a decision. Requires any judicial review to be as expeditious as possible and all petitions to be filed under seal. Requires any court proceedings, upon request from the government, to be ex parte and in camera.
Amends federal criminal law, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Right to Financial Privacy Act, and the National Security Act of 1947 to require a person making a disclosure to identify to the Director or requesting official the person to whom such disclosure will be made or was made prior to the request, but permits withholding the identity of an attorney to whom a disclosure was or will be made to obtain legal advice or assistance with respect to the request.
Considers a library not to be a wire or electronic service communication provider for purposes of granting national security letters, unless the library provides "electronic communication service."
***********************************************************************************
Finally, in reviewing the December vote in the House, the following House members also voted NO on final passage of the Patriot Act:
Baird, Dicks, Inslee, and Smith. McDermott did not vote.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
To "Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States..."
For those who may have forgotten (See List Below):
THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Amendments 1-10 of the Constitution
________________________________________
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
________________________________________
Today, March 7, 2006, The United States House of Representatives followed the lead of the United States Senate and, by a vote of 280 to 138 (with 14 not voting) reaffirmed the most blatant assault on American civil liberties since the Sedition Act of 1798, The USA Patriot Act. Of Washington State's eleven member Congressional delegation, the sell-out (vote) was as follows:
Aye:
Sen. Maria Cantwell (d)
Rep. Brian Baird (d)
Rep. Norm Dicks (d)
Rep. Doc Hastings (R)
Rep. Rick Larsen (d)
Rep. Kathy McMorris (R)
Rep. Dave Reichert (R)
Rep. Adam Smith (d)
Nay:
Sen. Patty Murray (D)
Rep. Jay Inslee (D)
Rep. Jim McDermott (D)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't it great to know that when your government comes for you it will be a bipartisan contingent?
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Amendments 1-10 of the Constitution
________________________________________
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
________________________________________
Today, March 7, 2006, The United States House of Representatives followed the lead of the United States Senate and, by a vote of 280 to 138 (with 14 not voting) reaffirmed the most blatant assault on American civil liberties since the Sedition Act of 1798, The USA Patriot Act. Of Washington State's eleven member Congressional delegation, the sell-out (vote) was as follows:
Aye:
Sen. Maria Cantwell (d)
Rep. Brian Baird (d)
Rep. Norm Dicks (d)
Rep. Doc Hastings (R)
Rep. Rick Larsen (d)
Rep. Kathy McMorris (R)
Rep. Dave Reichert (R)
Rep. Adam Smith (d)
Nay:
Sen. Patty Murray (D)
Rep. Jay Inslee (D)
Rep. Jim McDermott (D)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't it great to know that when your government comes for you it will be a bipartisan contingent?
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/07/06
Americans Killed: 2302
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,473
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Spc. Christopher S. Merchant, 32, of Hardwick, Vt., died in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, on March 1.
*Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder, of Finksburg, Md., died March 3 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
Peace,
Chad (TheLeft) Shue
Americans Killed: 2302
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,473
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Spc. Christopher S. Merchant, 32, of Hardwick, Vt., died in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, on March 1.
*Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder, of Finksburg, Md., died March 3 in Al Anbar province, Iraq.
Peace,
Chad (TheLeft) Shue
Sunday, March 05, 2006
Just Whose Party is it?
(Thanks to Carol Cates for the updates on this important issue)
As many of you know, I have a strong sense of rejection toward the policy of the Democratic Party (at both the state and national levels) interfering with the recruitment of local candidates for elective office unless they have been asked to help by the local party offices. In our own state, we have the example of the 8th CD race of 2004. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the state party chair, Paul Berendt, recruited a last minute candidate after two other candidates had invested time and money (in one case, at the behest of Mr. Berendt himself and certain members of our own congressional delegation) to challenge for an open seat. It is my opinion that this act of outside interference directly impacted the outcome of that race. (I am pleased to note that our entire Democratic Congressional Delegation is standing up to the DCCC this year by putting their full support behind Darcy Burner who appears to have strong local grassrtoots support in the 8th CD.
This year's outrage is taking place in Illinois' 6th CD; home of the retiring Henry Hyde of "Clinton Impeachment Fame." In 2004, DFA endorsed and grassroots supported Christine Cegelis ran a spirited, if underfunded, race against Hyde; garnering over 40% of the vote in an obviously republican district. In 2006, with the retirement of Mr. Hyde, one would think that Christine Cegelis would have an absolute lock on the Democratic nomination for that seat. Enter Rahm Emanuel and the DCCC.
In a move that defines the identity crisis the Democratic Party is suffering, Mr. Emanuel and the DLC influenced DCCC have determined that it would be bad form to endorse and support the Progressive home-grown candidate. So you would think that they would have a more "centrist" local candidate in mind. Not so fast. This is 2006 and the DLC mantra is "Democrats - Image is Everything - Message gets in the Way". To challenge Christine Cegelis, the DCCC has gone outside the district to recruit Iraq Invasion Veteran and double amputee, Major Tammy Duckworth.
Major Duckworth certainly has an inspirational story and deserves the respect of a grateful nation but I think it is fair to ask what gives her the edge over a candidate with previous experience, local name recognition, and overwhelming grassroots support. The answer is, the full and unabashed support of the National Democratic Machine. What follows is an exchange between a local Cegelis supporter and (are you sitting down?) Senator John F. Kerry. :
"Dear CXX,
The johnkerry.com community has done it again. 48 hours ago, I sent an urgent appeal asking our johnkerry.com community to rally behind three brave Iraq war veterans running for Congress.
Thousands of you answered the call, raising over a quarter of a million dollars to help Illinois veteran Tammy Duckworth and two veterans running vitally important campaigns in Pennsylvania.
Keep the momentum going...."
"Today, we're adding two more veterans to our campaign - one who deployed in support of the war in Afghanistan and another who saw duty in Desert Shield and Desert Storm. And we're pressing for even more support for Tammy Duckworth, who is only 18 days away from a general election campaign in which the GOP will throw everything they have at her...."
************************************************************************************
Senator Kerry,
I was very upset when I received your first e-mail asking for donations for
Tammy Duckworth's congressional campaign. While I am grateful for the great personal sacrifice Major Duckworth made in service to our country, her campaign is doing a great disservice to the people of Illinois' sixth district.
The people in this district already had a great candidate - Christine Cegelis
- before Congressman Emanuel, in his "infinite wisdom," recruited Major Duckworth. Ms. Cegelis is smart, capable, hard working, and caring. She also comes from a union household. In a district which had been written off a solid Republican, Ms. Cegelis had the courage to stand up against a major Republican leader like Henry Hyde and inspire others to stand with her. Considering that she had absolutely NO name recognition before she ran in '04, Ms. Cegelis did very well against Hyde.
Now that Hyde has announced his retirement, Ms. Cegelis deserves a clear shot
at the seat, or at least a shot without you Washington insiders getting in the way. Instead, however, you folks, thinking that you know better than the people on the ground in the district, have recruited a candidate who doesn't even live in the district, and who's only qualification seems to be her military service in Iraq.
While all of this is upsetting enough, what really motivated me to write to
you is that you chose to use false and misleading information in the e-mail below, in an effort to get people to donate to Major Duckworth.
You stated, "And we're pressing for even more support for Tammy Duckworth, who is only 18 days away from a general election campaign in which the GOP will throw everything they have at her."
What is the matter with you? There is no general election on the 21st! That is a primary election, and Major Duckworth will be facing fellow Democrat Christine Cegelis, NOT THE GOP!! Are you so afraid that Ms. Cegelis might win that you raise a false threat in order to motivate people to donate to your candidate? This is absolutely shameful. Your arrogance is the reason that the Democratic Party keeps losing election after election.
Please, for the sake of Democrats everywhere, and in Illinois' sixth congressional district in particular, mind your own business!
Cxxx Jxxx,
************************************************************************************
If you care about the Democratic Party, please write to the DCCC (dccc@dccc.org) and let them know you will not stand for the continuing interference and influence of the DLC. Tell them that this is the Democratic Party and they should let the people decide.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
As many of you know, I have a strong sense of rejection toward the policy of the Democratic Party (at both the state and national levels) interfering with the recruitment of local candidates for elective office unless they have been asked to help by the local party offices. In our own state, we have the example of the 8th CD race of 2004. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the state party chair, Paul Berendt, recruited a last minute candidate after two other candidates had invested time and money (in one case, at the behest of Mr. Berendt himself and certain members of our own congressional delegation) to challenge for an open seat. It is my opinion that this act of outside interference directly impacted the outcome of that race. (I am pleased to note that our entire Democratic Congressional Delegation is standing up to the DCCC this year by putting their full support behind Darcy Burner who appears to have strong local grassrtoots support in the 8th CD.
This year's outrage is taking place in Illinois' 6th CD; home of the retiring Henry Hyde of "Clinton Impeachment Fame." In 2004, DFA endorsed and grassroots supported Christine Cegelis ran a spirited, if underfunded, race against Hyde; garnering over 40% of the vote in an obviously republican district. In 2006, with the retirement of Mr. Hyde, one would think that Christine Cegelis would have an absolute lock on the Democratic nomination for that seat. Enter Rahm Emanuel and the DCCC.
In a move that defines the identity crisis the Democratic Party is suffering, Mr. Emanuel and the DLC influenced DCCC have determined that it would be bad form to endorse and support the Progressive home-grown candidate. So you would think that they would have a more "centrist" local candidate in mind. Not so fast. This is 2006 and the DLC mantra is "Democrats - Image is Everything - Message gets in the Way". To challenge Christine Cegelis, the DCCC has gone outside the district to recruit Iraq Invasion Veteran and double amputee, Major Tammy Duckworth.
Major Duckworth certainly has an inspirational story and deserves the respect of a grateful nation but I think it is fair to ask what gives her the edge over a candidate with previous experience, local name recognition, and overwhelming grassroots support. The answer is, the full and unabashed support of the National Democratic Machine. What follows is an exchange between a local Cegelis supporter and (are you sitting down?) Senator John F. Kerry. :
"Dear CXX,
The johnkerry.com community has done it again. 48 hours ago, I sent an urgent appeal asking our johnkerry.com community to rally behind three brave Iraq war veterans running for Congress.
Thousands of you answered the call, raising over a quarter of a million dollars to help Illinois veteran Tammy Duckworth and two veterans running vitally important campaigns in Pennsylvania.
Keep the momentum going...."
"Today, we're adding two more veterans to our campaign - one who deployed in support of the war in Afghanistan and another who saw duty in Desert Shield and Desert Storm. And we're pressing for even more support for Tammy Duckworth, who is only 18 days away from a general election campaign in which the GOP will throw everything they have at her...."
************************************************************************************
Senator Kerry,
I was very upset when I received your first e-mail asking for donations for
Tammy Duckworth's congressional campaign. While I am grateful for the great personal sacrifice Major Duckworth made in service to our country, her campaign is doing a great disservice to the people of Illinois' sixth district.
The people in this district already had a great candidate - Christine Cegelis
- before Congressman Emanuel, in his "infinite wisdom," recruited Major Duckworth. Ms. Cegelis is smart, capable, hard working, and caring. She also comes from a union household. In a district which had been written off a solid Republican, Ms. Cegelis had the courage to stand up against a major Republican leader like Henry Hyde and inspire others to stand with her. Considering that she had absolutely NO name recognition before she ran in '04, Ms. Cegelis did very well against Hyde.
Now that Hyde has announced his retirement, Ms. Cegelis deserves a clear shot
at the seat, or at least a shot without you Washington insiders getting in the way. Instead, however, you folks, thinking that you know better than the people on the ground in the district, have recruited a candidate who doesn't even live in the district, and who's only qualification seems to be her military service in Iraq.
While all of this is upsetting enough, what really motivated me to write to
you is that you chose to use false and misleading information in the e-mail below, in an effort to get people to donate to Major Duckworth.
You stated, "And we're pressing for even more support for Tammy Duckworth, who is only 18 days away from a general election campaign in which the GOP will throw everything they have at her."
What is the matter with you? There is no general election on the 21st! That is a primary election, and Major Duckworth will be facing fellow Democrat Christine Cegelis, NOT THE GOP!! Are you so afraid that Ms. Cegelis might win that you raise a false threat in order to motivate people to donate to your candidate? This is absolutely shameful. Your arrogance is the reason that the Democratic Party keeps losing election after election.
Please, for the sake of Democrats everywhere, and in Illinois' sixth congressional district in particular, mind your own business!
Cxxx Jxxx,
************************************************************************************
If you care about the Democratic Party, please write to the DCCC (dccc@dccc.org) and let them know you will not stand for the continuing interference and influence of the DLC. Tell them that this is the Democratic Party and they should let the people decide.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
I have the power
From a post at Washblog:
I Have the Power.........
By: The Left Shue - Sun Mar 05, 2006 at 09:21:08 AM PST
What a difference a presidential election can make. The precinct caucuses in Everett's 38th LD were a mere shadow of the 2004 events. Of course only a certain amount of the explanation for that can lie in the fact that there wasn't a nominating element to these gatherings. In the end it is the responsibility of the PCO to communicate the importance of these "off-year" caucuses with their neighbors so that they will feel a genuine desire to participate in our shared democracy. .......
Go here: Washblog for the rest of the story...
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
I Have the Power.........
By: The Left Shue - Sun Mar 05, 2006 at 09:21:08 AM PST
What a difference a presidential election can make. The precinct caucuses in Everett's 38th LD were a mere shadow of the 2004 events. Of course only a certain amount of the explanation for that can lie in the fact that there wasn't a nominating element to these gatherings. In the end it is the responsibility of the PCO to communicate the importance of these "off-year" caucuses with their neighbors so that they will feel a genuine desire to participate in our shared democracy. .......
Go here: Washblog for the rest of the story...
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Saturday, March 04, 2006
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/04/06
Americans Killed: 2300
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,270
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Lance Cpl. John J. Thornton, 22, of Phoenix, Ariz., died Feb. 25 of wounds received as a result of an enemy mortar attack in Ar Ramadi, Iraq.
*Sgt. Joshua V. Youmans, 26, of Flushing, Mich., died at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas, on March 1, from injuries sustained in Habbaniyah, Iraq on Nov. 21.
*Pfc. Tina M. Priest, 20, of Austin, Texas, died in Taji, Iraq on March 1.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2300
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,270
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Lance Cpl. John J. Thornton, 22, of Phoenix, Ariz., died Feb. 25 of wounds received as a result of an enemy mortar attack in Ar Ramadi, Iraq.
*Sgt. Joshua V. Youmans, 26, of Flushing, Mich., died at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas, on March 1, from injuries sustained in Habbaniyah, Iraq on Nov. 21.
*Pfc. Tina M. Priest, 20, of Austin, Texas, died in Taji, Iraq on March 1.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Friday, March 03, 2006
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/03/06
Americans Killed: 2298
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,225
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Pfc. Benjamin C. Schuster, 21, of Williamsville, N.Y., died in Ar Ramadi, Iraq on Feb. 25.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2298
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,225
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Pfc. Benjamin C. Schuster, 21, of Williamsville, N.Y., died in Ar Ramadi, Iraq on Feb. 25.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Thursday, March 02, 2006
Betrayal
(Emphasis added) LS
The troops are speaking out and they seem confused and mis-informed. In a recent Zogby poll, "An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and nearly one in four say the troops should leave immediately..." "The wide-ranging poll also shows that 58% of those serving in country say the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds, while 42% said it is either somewhat or very unclear to them, that they have no understanding of it at all, or are unsure." Perhaps the most telling piece of information for me is the following, "While 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks," 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was "to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq." For the Bush Administration to claim that they never put forward a connection between Saddam and 9-11 and then see these numbers reflected by the troops in the field simply defies belief.
Asking our troops to engage in combat and risk life or limb has got to be the most solemn act of any Commander in Chief. In so doing, the level of trust between our government and our troops must be without question. The commitment of these brave men and women in defense of our country must never be politicized or trivialized and yet, nowhere in these poll numbers is there any sense of "defense of country" amongst the rationales expressed by these troops when asked why they are in that country: "Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there," said Pollster John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. "Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein." Just 24% said that "establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war. Only small percentages see the mission there as securing oil supplies (11%) or to provide long-term bases for US troops in the region (6%). " To read the information contained in this latest poll must lead you to believe that there is a rising sense of betrayal felt by more and more of our service men and women.
For those who say "Support the Troops", I say now more than ever we must join together in that effort. Support the Troops - Bring them Home! They deserve nothing less.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
The troops are speaking out and they seem confused and mis-informed. In a recent Zogby poll, "An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and nearly one in four say the troops should leave immediately..." "The wide-ranging poll also shows that 58% of those serving in country say the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds, while 42% said it is either somewhat or very unclear to them, that they have no understanding of it at all, or are unsure." Perhaps the most telling piece of information for me is the following, "While 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks," 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was "to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq." For the Bush Administration to claim that they never put forward a connection between Saddam and 9-11 and then see these numbers reflected by the troops in the field simply defies belief.
Asking our troops to engage in combat and risk life or limb has got to be the most solemn act of any Commander in Chief. In so doing, the level of trust between our government and our troops must be without question. The commitment of these brave men and women in defense of our country must never be politicized or trivialized and yet, nowhere in these poll numbers is there any sense of "defense of country" amongst the rationales expressed by these troops when asked why they are in that country: "Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there," said Pollster John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. "Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein." Just 24% said that "establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war. Only small percentages see the mission there as securing oil supplies (11%) or to provide long-term bases for US troops in the region (6%). " To read the information contained in this latest poll must lead you to believe that there is a rising sense of betrayal felt by more and more of our service men and women.
For those who say "Support the Troops", I say now more than ever we must join together in that effort. Support the Troops - Bring them Home! They deserve nothing less.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Open Apology to Senator Cantwell
For some time now, I have been stating some of the reasons that I have been upset with Senator Cantwell and the votes she has cast that I feel do not represent my values. Amongst those reasons I have been asserting that Sen. Cantwell voted for both rounds of the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy. In doing some research for a posting on another Blog in the last 24 hours, I have determined that there is no credible reference for that claim and want to take this time and space to publicly apologize to Senator Cantwell for making these assertions without merit.
There is no and I claim no excuse for this lack of due diligence on my part and sincerely regret any harm that may have been caused by my lack of good judgment. We all are aware of the effects that unsubstantiated claims made on the internet can have on others and I am especially concerned for any impact (however minor) my false assertions may have had on any persons who may have read my postings on this subject.
I welcome now and in the future any challenges to information that I will put forth on this Blog and hope that those who read my words will use good judgment in following up on anything that they feel may be in question. Even in the limited space of this Blog, there is a great responsibility to be honest and truthful. I accept that responsibility and, again, apologize to Senator Cantwell and to those who may read this Blog.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
There is no and I claim no excuse for this lack of due diligence on my part and sincerely regret any harm that may have been caused by my lack of good judgment. We all are aware of the effects that unsubstantiated claims made on the internet can have on others and I am especially concerned for any impact (however minor) my false assertions may have had on any persons who may have read my postings on this subject.
I welcome now and in the future any challenges to information that I will put forth on this Blog and hope that those who read my words will use good judgment in following up on anything that they feel may be in question. Even in the limited space of this Blog, there is a great responsibility to be honest and truthful. I accept that responsibility and, again, apologize to Senator Cantwell and to those who may read this Blog.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/02/06
Americans Killed: 2296
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,225
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Staff Sgt. Christopher J. Schornak, 28, of Hoover, Ala., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 26.
*Sgt. Dimitri Muscat, 21, of Aurora, Colo., died in Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 24.
*Pvt. Joshua F. Powers, 21, of Skiatook, Okla., died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 24.
*Spc. Clay P. Farr, 21, of Bakersfield, Calif. died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 26.
*Spc. Joshua U. Humble, 21, of Appleton, Maine. died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 26.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2296
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,225
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Staff Sgt. Christopher J. Schornak, 28, of Hoover, Ala., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 26.
*Sgt. Dimitri Muscat, 21, of Aurora, Colo., died in Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 24.
*Pvt. Joshua F. Powers, 21, of Skiatook, Okla., died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 24.
*Spc. Clay P. Farr, 21, of Bakersfield, Calif. died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 26.
*Spc. Joshua U. Humble, 21, of Appleton, Maine. died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 26.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
IWR News
Iraq Body Count: 3/01/06
Americans Killed: 2296
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,225
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Sgt. Jessie Davila, 29, of Greensburg, Kan., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 20
*Lance Cpl. Adam J. Vanalstine, 21, of Superior, Wis., died Feb. 25, in Ar Ramadi, Iraq.
*Staff Sgt. Curtis T. Howard II, 32, of Ann Arbor, Mich. died near Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 22.
*Sgt. Gordon F. Misner II, 23, of Sparks, Nev. died near Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 22.
*Spc. Thomas J. Wilwerth, 21, of Mastic, N.Y. died near Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 22.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Americans Killed: 2296
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,225
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................
Latest Confirmed Casualties:
*Sgt. Jessie Davila, 29, of Greensburg, Kan., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 20
*Lance Cpl. Adam J. Vanalstine, 21, of Superior, Wis., died Feb. 25, in Ar Ramadi, Iraq.
*Staff Sgt. Curtis T. Howard II, 32, of Ann Arbor, Mich. died near Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 22.
*Sgt. Gordon F. Misner II, 23, of Sparks, Nev. died near Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 22.
*Spc. Thomas J. Wilwerth, 21, of Mastic, N.Y. died near Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 22.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)