Now it appears we have sanity in the House and none in the Senate? What is going on in Washington? Typically, the House of Representatives are the hotheads that furiously debate issues and the Senate calmly, and rationally take on the issues raised by the House. But now it appears to be turned around.
Take today for instance, the Senate simply pushed through the GOP crafted FISA bill. Effectively, bowing to pressure from the Bush Administration and the GOP cries that this will stave off some invisable, unseen and impending terrorist attack. All this despite the fact that the current FISA rules do not say they can't eavesdrop on these communications, they simply need to get warrants to do so. And these warrants are still the type that can be requested "after" the communications are intercepted. So please give me a break! The issue is not impossible, just difficult given that they don't like asking for warrants period.
But what gets my dander up is that we have been doing this for five years or so and they are now complaining that it has to be done immediately if not yesterday! This is a typical GOP tactic of using the "GWOT" as a rubberstamp to push whatever they desire through Congress. Well I am glad for once to see someone putting the brakes on and attempting to evaluate the FISA bill instead of giving Bush another "Blank Check" to run his private war. Accountability is a necessary part of any legislation and after five years of letting them run things into the ground it is time to put accountability back into government.
Thank you Rep. Nancy Pelosi!
Calling it like I see it,
Wynter
Article from CNN - http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/04/congress.fisa/index.html
Saturday, August 4, 2007
Friday, August 3, 2007
The Ugly Side of American Foreign Policy
In the business world today image is very important. It is closely guarded in the form of trademarks, emblems, advertisements, and such by a small group of designated representatives of these corporations. These corporate ambassador's to the public are much the same as our U.S. State Department is for our government as a whole. And the worst thing that can happen to a this is to have it hijacked by people that are not part of the official channels. This seems to be the case when politicians vying for higher office decide to blurt out clearly outrageous remarks as Tancredo did recently by threatening that if he were in charge he would warn Muslim Extremists that the U.S. would target their most holy sites in retaliation. Now to make this clear for any Muslims that may read this blog. Please note that the American People would NOT stand nor allow such actions to ever take place. Actions like this would be considered a war crime if it was ever attempted as a policy.
Tancredo article from CNN - http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/03/tancredo-bomb-muslim-holy-sites-first/
Now that type of comment by Rep. Tancredo while totally in the extreme is not the only item of issue that has come out of our wonderful electorial process. We all need to consider our words more carefully so that we don't impact our current government foreign policy. As in the case where Sen. Obama attempted to show that he is not naive when it comes to dealing with other world leaders. He deemed it necessary to threaten to invade Pakistan in his search for Osama Bin Laden and the remaining Taliban elements. Well this may make great political fodder, it makes a horrible impression on our current attempts to get some cooperation from Pakistan so we can go into that country quietly and assist them in taking out the Taliban forces. This action by Sen. Obama comes right back to him as a prime example of how naive he is in these matters of state. Of course we all wish would could walk into a foreign country and extricate those that may be planning to destroy our country, but we don't broadcast these plans so indelicately and directly as he has. We simply state that we will have a policy of intervention where possible and with close coordination with our allies. Nothing more than that. And definitely nothing specific!
Article - http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/03/obama.pakistan.ap/index.html
This all goes to show how our own officials can destroy and distort the message of our foreign policy to the world. We may be a country with many free voices, but we must all be aware that we all have a responsibility to watch what we say in our country's name.
In my own perspective,
Wynter
Tancredo article from CNN - http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/03/tancredo-bomb-muslim-holy-sites-first/
Now that type of comment by Rep. Tancredo while totally in the extreme is not the only item of issue that has come out of our wonderful electorial process. We all need to consider our words more carefully so that we don't impact our current government foreign policy. As in the case where Sen. Obama attempted to show that he is not naive when it comes to dealing with other world leaders. He deemed it necessary to threaten to invade Pakistan in his search for Osama Bin Laden and the remaining Taliban elements. Well this may make great political fodder, it makes a horrible impression on our current attempts to get some cooperation from Pakistan so we can go into that country quietly and assist them in taking out the Taliban forces. This action by Sen. Obama comes right back to him as a prime example of how naive he is in these matters of state. Of course we all wish would could walk into a foreign country and extricate those that may be planning to destroy our country, but we don't broadcast these plans so indelicately and directly as he has. We simply state that we will have a policy of intervention where possible and with close coordination with our allies. Nothing more than that. And definitely nothing specific!
Article - http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/03/obama.pakistan.ap/index.html
This all goes to show how our own officials can destroy and distort the message of our foreign policy to the world. We may be a country with many free voices, but we must all be aware that we all have a responsibility to watch what we say in our country's name.
In my own perspective,
Wynter
Congress Takes a Break... or will they?
Given the recent Gonzales hearings and the Larry King Lovefest with Dick Cheney this week, I thought I had heard all the garbage that was going to be thrown out at the public. Well I was wrong!
George Bush is whining and stomping his feet in front of the podium like a little boy that just can't take No for an answer. He is all upset about his illegal eavesdropping program being held up by Congress. He claims that it's vital we get this passed to protect the United States from imminent attack. Whereas the Congress is trying to balance what is legal under the Constitution and what is totally whacked! I mean, give me a break, good ole boy Alberto is going to be put in charge of determining what is legal to eavesdrop on? Come on George! The man is under investigation for lying to Congress at the moment and will likely come under impeachment hearings any week now. Do you really expect Congress to let him manage anything more than validating White House parking vouchers? The man should have been taken out and shot back when he tried to make torture a legal method of interrogation. Good Lord!
So instead of trying to obtain some respectable agreement with those people in Congress, George starts taking the hardball route and complaining to the public that we are left unprotected. Nice way to play nice in the sand pile, George. Seems like someone needs a timeout or at least a lesson in negotiating. I guess I shouldn't expect much since he doesn't understand our form of government since he lost his vice president to the Legislative branch. Seems they are paying him anyways. Shouldn't they be able to fire him? Wishful thinking....
Well since George can't Veto legislation that hasn't reached an agreement yet, he is threatening to call Congress back into session if they adjorn for the summer month long break. Okay George, that will REALLY get them to agree with anything you ask... right. You will be lucky to get enough funds from Congress to pay off your White House gardener. Better get used to watering those roses out back yourself!
If you look at the situation at this moment. We have been breaking the law since 2002 on the eavesdropping program. That is approximately five years of improper use of our communications systems by the NSA and the White House. Have they really stopped anything during those five years? Hmmm... nothing groundbreaking. I don't think we should be so quick to rubber stamp another six months or more of this Bush league wiretapping until we determine what is legal and what isn't. Also, we should have ALL the checks and balances in place. I mean, five years is enough time to be able to determine the value of a program and to have at least an IDEA of what is needed and what is just too damn sensitive to listen in on. So Mr. Bush, take a valium and wait for the Congress to come up with a policy to cover this program. It's called Democracy, George. Get used to it.
Telling it from my persepective,
Wynter Dragon
If you have a point of your own, please feel free to comment. But please let's keep this to the point and without a lot of rhetoric. Thanks!
Article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/03/fisa.upgrade.ap/index.html
George Bush is whining and stomping his feet in front of the podium like a little boy that just can't take No for an answer. He is all upset about his illegal eavesdropping program being held up by Congress. He claims that it's vital we get this passed to protect the United States from imminent attack. Whereas the Congress is trying to balance what is legal under the Constitution and what is totally whacked! I mean, give me a break, good ole boy Alberto is going to be put in charge of determining what is legal to eavesdrop on? Come on George! The man is under investigation for lying to Congress at the moment and will likely come under impeachment hearings any week now. Do you really expect Congress to let him manage anything more than validating White House parking vouchers? The man should have been taken out and shot back when he tried to make torture a legal method of interrogation. Good Lord!
So instead of trying to obtain some respectable agreement with those people in Congress, George starts taking the hardball route and complaining to the public that we are left unprotected. Nice way to play nice in the sand pile, George. Seems like someone needs a timeout or at least a lesson in negotiating. I guess I shouldn't expect much since he doesn't understand our form of government since he lost his vice president to the Legislative branch. Seems they are paying him anyways. Shouldn't they be able to fire him? Wishful thinking....
Well since George can't Veto legislation that hasn't reached an agreement yet, he is threatening to call Congress back into session if they adjorn for the summer month long break. Okay George, that will REALLY get them to agree with anything you ask... right. You will be lucky to get enough funds from Congress to pay off your White House gardener. Better get used to watering those roses out back yourself!
If you look at the situation at this moment. We have been breaking the law since 2002 on the eavesdropping program. That is approximately five years of improper use of our communications systems by the NSA and the White House. Have they really stopped anything during those five years? Hmmm... nothing groundbreaking. I don't think we should be so quick to rubber stamp another six months or more of this Bush league wiretapping until we determine what is legal and what isn't. Also, we should have ALL the checks and balances in place. I mean, five years is enough time to be able to determine the value of a program and to have at least an IDEA of what is needed and what is just too damn sensitive to listen in on. So Mr. Bush, take a valium and wait for the Congress to come up with a policy to cover this program. It's called Democracy, George. Get used to it.
Telling it from my persepective,
Wynter Dragon
If you have a point of your own, please feel free to comment. But please let's keep this to the point and without a lot of rhetoric. Thanks!
Article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/03/fisa.upgrade.ap/index.html
Friday, July 27, 2007
The Truth is out there?
It appears that the very definition of "truth" is in the mind of the person speaking at the time in these congressional hearings. Yesterday, Mr. Gonzales spoke his version of the truth about his bedside conversations with Ashcroft and stated that the subject of the conversation was not the NSA Program that conducts domestic eavesdropping. But instead alluded that the subject was some other program which he would not describe to them.
This seems to conflict with Mr. Comey's testimony and he was even in the room at the time! Mr. Comey, whom was acting head of the DOJ while Ashcroft was in the hospital, states that Gonzales asked him to reauthorize the domestic eavesdropping program and he turned him down. Then soon afterwards he paid a surprise visit on Ashcroft to pressure him to overrule his acting head of the DOJ. This would be a simple case of two different versions of the truth, but now Mr. Mueller, then head of the FBI, agrees with Mr. Comey as he spoke with Mr. Ashcroft after the meeting and was told the same thing from him.
And now that everyone on the hill is upset enough to start seriously looking at calling a special prosecutor we get a calming voice from our illustrious FOX correspondent now Press Secretary for the white house saying that its all simply a matter of using different words to say the same thing. He goes on to say that its all a mistake because sensitive issues require complex terminology and congress just can't seem to handle big words. Well maybe he didn't say the last part, but he alluded to it! But to summarize he makes the statement that "misinterpretations" and "misleading remarks" are bound to occur when discussing sensitive issues. I'm sorry, but that is a truck load of foul smelling fertilizer he is trying to get the people to swallow. Congress is perfectly capable of going into a classified hearing to discuss sensitive topics.
But the problem here is that Mr. Gonzales didn't state that fact. He simply lied to cover what was said. Whether that was a bonehead mistake to protect something sensitive or that he was trying to cover his rear we can't tell until the truth of the matter comes out. But the fact still remains. If he couldn't discuss the topic then he should have said so. Instead he chose to fabricate some loophole in terminology to make it appear he didn't discuss the Domestic Eavesdropping Program, because let's say he referred to it as "Program 916" instead at the hospital. So there, he wasn't talking about the eavesdropping program!
Mr. Snow states today that "Does Bob Mueller once use the phrase 'terrorist surveillance program'?" Snow asked. "The answer is no. He talks about 'an NSA program.'" So was he there to give him a floral bouqet and a card? Again NO! These symantics while somewhat acceptable when trying to explain to your wife why you where out late at night are NOT acceptable when under oath in front of a congressional hearing. Sorry, Mr. Snow... no points for you this round.
Article - http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/27/gonzales/index.html
Respectfully,
Wynter
This seems to conflict with Mr. Comey's testimony and he was even in the room at the time! Mr. Comey, whom was acting head of the DOJ while Ashcroft was in the hospital, states that Gonzales asked him to reauthorize the domestic eavesdropping program and he turned him down. Then soon afterwards he paid a surprise visit on Ashcroft to pressure him to overrule his acting head of the DOJ. This would be a simple case of two different versions of the truth, but now Mr. Mueller, then head of the FBI, agrees with Mr. Comey as he spoke with Mr. Ashcroft after the meeting and was told the same thing from him.
And now that everyone on the hill is upset enough to start seriously looking at calling a special prosecutor we get a calming voice from our illustrious FOX correspondent now Press Secretary for the white house saying that its all simply a matter of using different words to say the same thing. He goes on to say that its all a mistake because sensitive issues require complex terminology and congress just can't seem to handle big words. Well maybe he didn't say the last part, but he alluded to it! But to summarize he makes the statement that "misinterpretations" and "misleading remarks" are bound to occur when discussing sensitive issues. I'm sorry, but that is a truck load of foul smelling fertilizer he is trying to get the people to swallow. Congress is perfectly capable of going into a classified hearing to discuss sensitive topics.
But the problem here is that Mr. Gonzales didn't state that fact. He simply lied to cover what was said. Whether that was a bonehead mistake to protect something sensitive or that he was trying to cover his rear we can't tell until the truth of the matter comes out. But the fact still remains. If he couldn't discuss the topic then he should have said so. Instead he chose to fabricate some loophole in terminology to make it appear he didn't discuss the Domestic Eavesdropping Program, because let's say he referred to it as "Program 916" instead at the hospital. So there, he wasn't talking about the eavesdropping program!
Mr. Snow states today that "Does Bob Mueller once use the phrase 'terrorist surveillance program'?" Snow asked. "The answer is no. He talks about 'an NSA program.'" So was he there to give him a floral bouqet and a card? Again NO! These symantics while somewhat acceptable when trying to explain to your wife why you where out late at night are NOT acceptable when under oath in front of a congressional hearing. Sorry, Mr. Snow... no points for you this round.
Article - http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/27/gonzales/index.html
Respectfully,
Wynter
Monday, July 23, 2007
Spinning the September Assessment
This week the white house and the pentagon appear to be in full spin mode! First came the statements saying "Wait till September!". And now they are trying to downplay the September benchmarks and saying "... I need at least until November." from Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno when he was asked about the September assessments. So let me get this straight. We had originally thought that by September we would see some improvement in Iraq at some measureable level so we all agreed on a set of benchmarks for that point in time. Now what they are trying to say is that we can't assess the benchmarks adequately at the September point in time. But instead we need more time to get the numbers together... Let's say... hmmm.. sometime in November? I wish I had used that one when the teachers asked for my term paper!
This assessment is simply a summary of where the country is in relation to the set of benchmarks that congress and the white house determined Iraq should be at by that point in time. As Jack Webb would have put it, "Just the Facts, Maam." We all could guess by this time that there are going to be some areas where we will be sorely lacking in the assessment. For example, the oil revenues being shared equally throughout the country. That is to be expected. But to have the spin doctors try to say that "we can't really assess things at this time so call us back next month" is beyond belief.
What is needed at this time is for the administration and the pentagon to be realistic about the situation and start telling us the truth about the current situation. Putting the president up to the podium at some Ohio Plant and spouting off about how great our boys are doing in Iraq is no longer working. The people of this country are not buying what he is selling any longer. If this administration would only be honest with congress about this war I believe we could get form a plan to resolve this situation. Some people may be out of a job, but the time this is over. But at least we will reach the light at the end of the tunnel a great deal faster.
Article - http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/20/congress.iraq.ap/index.html
Respectfully,
Wynter
This assessment is simply a summary of where the country is in relation to the set of benchmarks that congress and the white house determined Iraq should be at by that point in time. As Jack Webb would have put it, "Just the Facts, Maam." We all could guess by this time that there are going to be some areas where we will be sorely lacking in the assessment. For example, the oil revenues being shared equally throughout the country. That is to be expected. But to have the spin doctors try to say that "we can't really assess things at this time so call us back next month" is beyond belief.
What is needed at this time is for the administration and the pentagon to be realistic about the situation and start telling us the truth about the current situation. Putting the president up to the podium at some Ohio Plant and spouting off about how great our boys are doing in Iraq is no longer working. The people of this country are not buying what he is selling any longer. If this administration would only be honest with congress about this war I believe we could get form a plan to resolve this situation. Some people may be out of a job, but the time this is over. But at least we will reach the light at the end of the tunnel a great deal faster.
Article - http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/20/congress.iraq.ap/index.html
Respectfully,
Wynter
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Second Assessment not going to Congress
I wonder what the thinking is at the pentagon these days? In for a penny in for a pound? JCS Chairman General Peter Pace is looking at the option of sending in a "second surge" of troops if needed. I know they like to make contingency plans for every possible situation, but a second surge of troops is pretty far fetched. Given the current state of this country, I think a second surge would be hard for anyone to swallow on the hill or even at the white house.
"Pace said earlier in Baghdad that the U.S. military is continuing various options for Iraq, including an even bigger troop buildup if President Bush thinks his ''surge'' strategy needs a further boost.
Pace said the chiefs of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force are developing their own assessment of the situation in Iraq, to be presented to Bush in September, that will be separate from a report to Congress that month by Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander for Iraq."
- Quoted from Times Article - http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Iraq-Pace.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Telling it as I see it!
Wynter
"Pace said earlier in Baghdad that the U.S. military is continuing various options for Iraq, including an even bigger troop buildup if President Bush thinks his ''surge'' strategy needs a further boost.
Pace said the chiefs of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force are developing their own assessment of the situation in Iraq, to be presented to Bush in September, that will be separate from a report to Congress that month by Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander for Iraq."
- Quoted from Times Article - http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Iraq-Pace.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Telling it as I see it!
Wynter
Monday, July 16, 2007
Watch out Abbas! Bush is trying to help!
Okay... we have the democrats in the senate hammering the president over his bad iraq midterm report card. And its resonating so much that the some leading republicans are actually putting forth their own plans to the president to start executing a pullout. So what would you think Bush would do under so much pressure even from his own party to do something quick before the election next year! He shrugs it off till september and tells everyone to look at the problems Abbas is having with his Palestinian State!
I'm sorry... But WHAT the &#@& is he doing? I know its a standard political distraction tactic. But at the same time, I can hear everyone screaming from the hill saying, "NO! Don't touch it!", like frantic parents of a clumsy child in an expensive china shop. Let Israel and the U.N. work on that touchy subject. Or better yet send a diplomat, but not Condi as she has enough to do selling your failed agenda to congress. Anyone, but someone from the Bush administration! Maybe Bill Clinton can spare a few moments from the campaign trail with Hillary. We don't want to cause another war in the middle east? Do we?
Article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/16/us.mideast.ap/index.html
It's a bit cynical I'll admit. But tell me I'm not right?
Calling it as I see it,
Wynter
I'm sorry... But WHAT the &#@& is he doing? I know its a standard political distraction tactic. But at the same time, I can hear everyone screaming from the hill saying, "NO! Don't touch it!", like frantic parents of a clumsy child in an expensive china shop. Let Israel and the U.N. work on that touchy subject. Or better yet send a diplomat, but not Condi as she has enough to do selling your failed agenda to congress. Anyone, but someone from the Bush administration! Maybe Bill Clinton can spare a few moments from the campaign trail with Hillary. We don't want to cause another war in the middle east? Do we?
Article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/16/us.mideast.ap/index.html
It's a bit cynical I'll admit. But tell me I'm not right?
Calling it as I see it,
Wynter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
