Royally Kranked

Saturday, December 31, 2005

The Story Behind the Disappearing Dept Of Homeland Security Report and the "Reassigned" USA Attorney on Guam-The tie in between the President & Jack Abramoff

So I’m going through all sorts of pages I’ve downloaded & saved, especially the ones about Jack Abramoff, and I find this story from July of this year, and while the original link no longer comes up without paying for access to the LA Times Archives, just enter the article’s title into a search engine, and you’ll get more than enough citations of the same article

Here's the google cache/search results of the no longer available for free LA Times Story

There are two articles that will get referenced often, the LA Times Story-available as search results for any search engine entries entitled

“Inquiry Into Lobbyist Sputters After Demotion”

And the subheading

“The unusual financial deal between Jack Abramoff and officials in Guam drew scrutiny.”

The other article is one I mentioned on Halloween, and didn’t draw anywhere near as much attention as it deserved, seeing as it involved Jack Abramoff’s getting a Dept of Homeland Security report-mandated for the top politicians of both parties in the House & Senate-permanently delayed, and it’s on the Bloomberg website, entitled

“Justice Department Didn't Act on Warning About Abramoff Client”

For easy reference, a graph with either red (LAT) or (BLMB) will identify the story’s original sources/passages

The U.S. Justice Department never acted on a post-Sept. 11 proposal, contested by lobbyist Jack Abramoff, calling for increased federal control over immigration to the Mariana Islands.

“The agency reassigned the two officials who produced a 34- page report that contained the proposal, and House members of both parties who oversee the Homeland Security and Justice departments said they were never told about it. The 2002 report, a copy of which was obtained by Bloomberg News, warns that continued local control over the Marianas' borders will ``seriously jeopardize the national security'' of the U.S.” (BLMB)

It wasn’t actually the Agency so much did the reassigning as it was someone slightly higher up the chain of command

“ A U.S. grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor and the inquiry ended soon after...... In Guam, an American territory in the Pacific, investigators were looking into Abramoff's secret arrangement with Superior Court officials to lobby against a court revision bill then pending in the U.S. Congress. The legislation, since approved, gave the Guam Supreme Court authority over the Superior Court.” (LAT)

The inquiry served as the basis for what would later be the central charge in the Bloomberg article, a report commissioned by the Dept of Homeland Security, one that charged lax immigration standards on the Northern Marianas Islands-home to Sweatshop owners who used Abramoff to lobby against strengthening workplace safety and environmental protection regulations at the most miserable of their work sites-could lead to an attack on US interests ala the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Sudan

The immigrant to native ratio on the NM Islands is about 5:1, and the standards regarding identification are almost nonexistent

It’s in this climate that the Island’s Sweatshop Owners looked at this report about needing to tighten lax immigration standards from the only point of view that mattered, theirs, and for them, it’s a matter of BIG money involved

“ Restricting immigration could be a blow to the economy of the Marianas, which is located about three-quarters of the way to the Philippines from Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean......The Marianas have almost five times as many foreign workers as native workers and aren't subject to U.S. minimum-wage laws. That helps them export such goods as T-shirts, caps and pants cheaply to the U.S., all labeled ``made in USA...... Abramoff lobbied against efforts to tighten those laws. The islands have 28,717 foreign workers, compared with 6,006 natives, in the labor force, according to Central Intelligence Agency statistics.'' (BLMB)

It’s this group that has prevailed upon Abramoff to constantly lobby their most dependable ally in the Congress, one who would stand fast against the do-gooders intent on tightening up the Islands abysmal workplace safety & environmental laws

Tom DeLay

Before moving on with more of Abramoff’s actions, just how much clout he really had in the GOP, it’s important to notice what the report is about that’s got Abramoff so concerned with it’s release, a mindset in which he actually saw the DoJ as an obstacle to his lobbying efforts

“The 2002 report, a copy of which was obtained by Bloomberg News, warns that continued local control over the Marianas' borders will ``seriously jeopardize the national security'' of the U.S.”(BLMB)

“Black also arranged for a security review in the aftermath of Sept. 11 that was seen as a potential threat to loose immigration rules favored by local business leaders. In fact, the study ordered by Black eventually cited substantial security risks in Guam and the Northern Marianas.”(LAT)

“ The Justice Department report on the Marianas said the islands, which rely on tourism and are home to military facilities and visiting U.S. Navy vessels, ``offer a target-rich environment for terrorist activity.''

“Under a 1976 covenant between the commonwealth and the U.S., immigration laws don't apply to the Marianas ``except in the manner and to the extent made applicable to them by the Congress.'' (BLMB)

And it’s in THAT capacity that Abramoff reacts to the only thing that’s ever mattered to him, Money, the more the better

It’s that focus on money to the exclusion of everything else that makes Abramoff’s lust for money so brazen & defiant of all logic

“ Abramoff, whose law firm was paid $3.5 million by the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. territory, to lobby between 1998 and 2002, tried to block the report, according to an e-mail released this month by House Democrats.”(BLMB)

Even more brazen is who tipped him off to that impending DHS report commissioned by Black & Meissner, one of the bigger guns at the DoJ

“ In an Oct, 1, 2001, e-mail to the Marianas government, Abramoff said he was alerted to the pending immigration report by the Justice Department chief of staff, whom he hosted in his luxury box at a Washington Redskins football game. He said he would pass on to the government any information he received from the official. At the time, David Ayres was chief of staff...... In the e-mail, Abramoff warned that some ``bad guys'' in Justice had been saying the commonwealth ``if not taken over, will be a major entry point for terrorists. This, of course, is patently ridiculous and we have been working to counter this.''(BLMB)

“Patently Ridiculous” would usually apply to someone this filled with pure greed, except that in this case, it’s hard to see how Abramoff was exaggerating about the clout he possessed as the GOP’s superlobbyist, and here’s where the final pieces fall into place, the Administrative troublemakers unappreciative of W’s willing to do the bidding of one of the most corrupt figures in US history get their careers blocked during the investigation of weak spots in the Homeland’s Security

“ Abramoff said he would meet with then-Attorney General John Ashcroft. One of Abramoff's associates was Kevin Ring, who joined the firm after serving as counsel to a Judiciary subcommittee that Ashcroft chaired when he served in the U.S. Senate.

``We'll hope the higher ups will take some time to squash this on their own,'' Abramoff wrote.(BLMB)

“ Abramoff, who then represented the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, alerted his clients in a memo about the expected report and warned: "It will require some major action from the Hill and a press attack to get this back in the bottle."

“The lobbyist also wrote that he and his aides expected to meet in the near future with Justice Department officials, according to Abramoff billing documents released this year by the Marianas government.”(LAT)

The sticky wicket for Abramoff & W finally ensnared them in November 2002, on a separate issue entirely

“ In Guam, an American territory in the Pacific, investigators were looking into Abramoff's secret arrangement with Superior Court officials to lobby against a court revision bill then pending in the U.S. Congress. The legislation, since approved, gave the Guam Supreme Court authority over the Superior Court.

“In 2002, Abramoff was retained by the Superior Court in what was an unusual arrangement for a public agency. The Times reported in May that Abramoff was paid with a series of $9,000 checks funneled through a Laguna Beach lawyer to disguise the lobbyist's role working for the Guam court. No separate contract was authorized for Abramoff's work.

“ The transactions were the target of a grand jury subpoena issued Nov. 18, 2002, according to a copy obtained by The Times. The subpoena demanded that Anthony Sanchez, administrative director of the Guam Superior Court, release records involving the lobbying contract, including bills and payments.”(LAT)

Here’s where W’s self-aggrandizing myth of being the Grim Warrior protecting the unrighteous completely falls apart when it comes to keeping US interests around the world as safe as possible

“ A day later, the chief prosecutor, U.S. Atty. Frederick A. Black, who had launched the investigation, was demoted. A White House news release announced that Bush was replacing Black.”(LAT)

One Day Later

There’s no positive or logical spin that can be applied here, no way for the President to appear as anything but a hired enforcer of the most thuggish type, one more at home amongst the Saddam Hussein’s of the World as opposed to speaking unscripted in front of a hostile/skeptical audience asking questions not preapproved in advance of the proceedings

It’s important to note here that what gets President Jr to reassign the US Attorney, Frederick Black, is NOT the suppressed DHS Report, it’s a completely separate investigation into Abramoff & his clients by Black that gets W to act in a way that can only be labeled as “Damning” to any claims that the President gives a damn about National or Homeland Security-more on that in just a bit

So now the pieces fall into place on a puzzle most of us never saw, and there’s an unnerving question unanswered by W’s reassigning of US DOJ personnel the day after a Grand Jury is empaneled

Just what did the President get in return for such an unalloyed breach of Presidential power?

Consider that question in the context of Black’s career when W reassigned him

“ Black, 56, had served as acting U.S. attorney for Guam and the Northern Mariana islands since 1991.

“The career prosecutor, who had held a senior position as first assistant before accepting the acting U.S. attorney job, was demoted to a staff post. Black's demotion came after an intensive lobbying effort by supporters of Gov. Gutierrez, who had been publicly critical of Black and his investigative efforts.”(LAT)

And that DHS report commissioned by Black, the one with the release to the top officials in both parties in the House & Senate required, whatever became of it ultimately is a mystery to all involved

“ Lawmakers of both parties said they never saw the recommendations. ``I never saw such a report,'' said Representative Henry Hyde, an Illinois Republican and the former chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.”(BLMB)

I’ll ask again

Just what did W get from Abramoff for ridding him of that troublesome US Attorney, and looking the other way concerning leaks in his own Govt-The DoJ Chief Of Staff tipping off Abramoff to the critical DHS report soon to be released-leaks which have a DIRECT bearing on Homeland Security?

Abramoff’s motive in silencing the DHS report was monetary, just what was W’s motive in actively obstructing an investigation into the GOP’s top lobbyist?

Here’s the REALLY scary part

One occasion, or no more than a few would be bad enough, but this Administration is REPEATEDLY looking the other way when it comes to financial motives taking precedence over Homeland Security, as yet another article published in October 2005 so ably points out

“The Bush administration has missed dozens of deadlines set by Congress after the Sept. 11 attacks for developing ways to protect airplanes, ships and railways from attacks.

“A plan to defend ships and ports from attack is six months overdue. Rules to protect air cargo from infiltration are two months late. A study on the cost of giving anti-terrorism training to federal law enforcement officers who fly commercially was supposed to be done more than three years ago.”

Dozens of deadlines completely missed/ignored

What did President Jr get for saving Abramoff’s lobbying money, and what’s he getting for his Administration deliberately ignoring dozens of missed Homeland Security deadlines?

How, LOGICALLY, did the President’s reassigning of the US Attorney and the writer of the DHS report slamming the NM Islands for lax immigration security, uphold his sworn oath to protect the American public?

This massive clout is exactly why Abramoff is going to do damage to the GOP that will be far worse in scope than even the scourge of the Watergate scandal, the big players always fall hard

Friday, December 30, 2005

It's always fun to watch one group of homophobic retards fuck up another group of homophobic retards by being on the same side of the issue

Put THIS story in that grouping, and the sentiment expressed is one that EVERY homophobe with access to a camera, pulpit, microphone & audience needs to either agree or disagree with the repulsive sentiment emanating from an Iowa KKK Chapter

Iowa klansman wants protest of gay marriage

A Charles City man who said he's a member of the Ku Klux Klan is trying to organize a rally next month to protest attempts to legalize same-sex marriages in Iowa.

Douglas Sadler, 41, said his efforts are prompted by lawsuits filed earlier this month on behalf of six gay couples this month to alter the state’s marriage laws.

‘‘We don’t believe God’s law should be perverted any more than it already has been,’’ said Sadler, a Charles City resident and father of four. ‘‘The further we go away from God’s law, the further we get away from God.’’

Um, hey, DUMBFUCK, I don't think Jesus looks askance at the same groups you obviously have a problem with, and if anyone can point out in the New Testament just where Christ used the terms "faggot", "kike", "nigger", "honky", "spic", "chink", "cracker", "trailer trash", and "papist"-among others-I'd surely be obliged to publicly correct my misreading of said text

Sadler's stupidity is SO overwhelming that he's not content with merely one sinful strike against his weak faith & willfully ignorant mindset, nope, he's both homophobic AND racist

Somehow, as opposed to racists who hide their true feelings from public view, there's something to be said for someone so willing to put himself in the most rabid light publicly, makes it really easy to be part of any "usual suspects" rounded up or looked at whenever there's a gaybashing OR hate crime perpetrated

‘‘We don’t believe they have the right to marry,’’ Sadler said. ‘‘In fact, we don’t think they have the right to exist.’’

There's your wedge issue against the hard right, that sentiment ought to be expressed as part of what the GOP at the National Level is all about these days, catering to theological thugs & Cartoon Hating Wingnuts like Jerry falwell, Pappy Dobson, and their diseased & verminous ilk, Fred Phelps & Sun Myung Moon

They should be asked if that sentiment agrees with their beliefs, "yes" or "No", NO mealymouthed answers that try to satisfy all sides of the issue allowed or tolerated

It's time for the GOP & their theological wingnut base to start justifying their hatreds with something other than weak faith and willfully ignorant attitudes, arguments that can't be backed up logically, factually, economically, morally or ethically in any way shape or form

It also bears pointing out the obvious hypocrisy of tax-exempt organized religions spreading their message while subsidized by the taxes of unwilling others who differ in their religious lifestyle choice

Using the money of evildoers to spread the word of God is apparently not hypocritical in the least in God's Eyes

These most dim of wits, these most dumb of fucks, aren't so stupid they're blind to the fact that they know their time of political power is rapidly drawing to a close, and they're unable to stop that march towards progress & equality

The Modern Day Pharisees are on the wrong side of the issue, and they know their view is about to be very properly relegated to History's Rubbish Heap

For Another Rant Against The 'Phobe 'Tards, Peter LaBarbera in particular

And for a GREAT catchphrase that makes 'Phobe "Tards also look lazy AND Stupid at the same time.....

"I Must Have Been Out Of The Room"

Now THAT'S a Punchline

Friday, December 23, 2005

And W's arrogance gets worse & worse, this is nothing short of appalling, and the fact that major communications carriers were so willing to spread their legs at the drop of an Administrative hat is just as vile

HUGE Update in this post

bypass registration with

Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report

The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system's main arteries, they said.

As part of the program approved by President Bush for domestic surveillance without warrants, the N.S.A. has gained the cooperation of American telecommunications companies to obtain backdoor access to streams of domestic and international communications, the officials said.


Officials in the government and the telecommunications industry who have knowledge of parts of the program say the N.S.A. has sought to analyze communications patterns to glean clues from details like who is calling whom, how long a phone call lasts and what time of day it is made, and the origins and destinations of phone calls and e-mail messages. Calls to and from Afghanistan, for instance, are known to have been of particular interest to the N.S.A. since the Sept. 11 attacks, the officials said.

This so-called "pattern analysis" on calls within the United States would, in many circumstances, require a court warrant if the government wanted to trace who calls whom.

And here's where these companies rolled over for the Administration

A former technology manager at a major telecommunications company said that since the Sept. 11 attacks, the leading companies in the industry have been storing information on calling patterns and giving it to the federal government to aid in tracking possible terrorists.

"All that data is mined with the cooperation of the government and shared with them, and since 9/11, there's been much more active involvement in that area," said the former manager, a telecommunications expert who did not want his name or that of his former company used because of concern about revealing trade secrets.

Good Christ almighty, anyone want to explain, logically, how purely domestic communications WEREN'T spied upon, the communications that are supposedly strictly forbidden to be intercepted?

Several officials said that after President Bush's order authorizing the N.S.A. program, senior government officials arranged with officials of some of the nation's largest telecommunications companies to gain access to switches that act as gateways at the borders between the United States' communications networks and international networks. The identities of the corporations involved could not be determined.

The switches are some of the main arteries for moving voice and some Internet traffic into and out of the United States, and, with the globalization of the telecommunications industry in recent years, many international-to-international calls are also routed through such American switches.

One outside expert on communications privacy who previously worked at the N.S.A. said that to exploit its technological capabilities, the American government had in the last few years been quietly encouraging the telecommunications industry to increase the amount of international traffic that is routed through American-based switches.

Impeach this jerkoff ASAP, and I predict it will happen within two years, TOPS


Good Goddamned Almighty, this is CLEARLY beyond the pale

Spy net may pull in all U.S. calls overseas

The National Security Agency, in carrying out President Bush's order to intercept the international phone calls and e-mails of Americans suspected of links to al-Qaida, has probably been using computers to monitor all other Americans' international communications as well, according to specialists familiar with the workings of the NSA.


The Bush administration formally defended its domestic spying program in a letter to Congress late Thursday, saying the nation's security outweighs privacy concerns of individuals who are monitored.

Excuse my obtuseness, but W's right takes precedence over EVERYONE'S foreign comunications, so the Bill of Rights is now just a Bill of Suggestions?

And just how would all that info get analyzed, and just how many calls or other forms of comunications can be monitored at any one time?

The Bush administration and the NSA have declined to provide details about the program the president authorized in 2001, but specialists said the agency serves as a vast data collection and sorting operation. It captures reams of data from satellites, fiber-optic lines and Internet switching stations and then uses a computer to check for names, numbers and words that have been identified as suspicious.

"The whole idea of the NSA is intercepting huge streams of communications, taking in 2 million pieces of communications an hour," said James Bamford, the author of two books on the NSA, who was the first to reveal the inner workings of the secret agency.

So President Jr has the right to listen in & spy on all communications huh?

Explain how that makes him the best person to uphold our Constitutional protections, as opposed to the clearly incompetent hack unable to perform to the standards & skills the office of President requires

Until this point, I've always thought the argument that W was trying to establish a dictatorship was hyperbole, a rhetorical flourish

Now, I'm convinced that President Jr may actually be trying to establish just such a reality, and when that's combined with the clear illegality of monitoring purely domestic communications, a very harsh picture of W's true nature shows itself

President Jr is secrecy obsessed, he's done more to restrict the Public's Right To Know than any President before him, while at the same time, insisting that all the citizens in the US be open for his perusal at any time he chooses

"The collection of this data by automated means creates new privacy risks," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.....Among the risks, he said, is that the spy agency's computers will collect personal information that has no bearing on national security and that intelligence agents programming those computers will be tempted to abuse their power to eavesdrop for personal or political gain.

Hey, here's a fun thought

What if some al-Qaeda sympathizer in our Government gets access to this info, there's your ultimate irony

Bush and his aides have declined to answer questions about the spying program, other than to insist that it was legal. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales this week said the program only targeted messages "where we have a reasonable basis to conclude" that one of the parties is affiliated with al-Qaida.

So up to 2 million calls an hour can be monitored without a warrant needed for 3 days, and yet it's reasonable to conclude that ALL of those calls are al-Qaeda related?

And one more sentence is really worth bearing out here, especially considering that under W, evidence gathered during the course of an investigation is no longer disposed of, even if no charges are filed or the person investigated has done nothing wrong, this goes COMPLETELY against "Innocent unlss proven Guilty"

The administration has not revealed how long the NSA stores messages.

Impeach this fuckwit NOW!!!

Monday, December 19, 2005

Uh oh, looks like, according to President Jr & Cheneyburton's mindset, that the US troops now hate freedom as well, as is the case with anyone who doesn't enthusiastically allow the Administration's rhetorical blather & rigamarole to encompass them wholly

In other words, Cheneyburton got a bit of a bitchslap from the US Troops themselves

Shouts of "hooah!" from the audience interrupted Cheney a few times, but mostly the service members listened intently. When he delivered the applause line, "We're in this fight to win. These colors don't run," the only sound was a lone whistle.

Oh yeah, one other little nugget here, and if this is how the US tries to pass off underequipping the Iraqi troops & security forces needed to bring stability back to the Iraqis themselves, then only a fool with the brain the size of a chipmunk-Yes, that WOULD be President Jr-sees continuing success against an insurgency supposedly in it's "last throes"

Then again, maybe the terrorists & insurgents will start doing the "BANG" thing with their fingers as well

His next visit was to Taji Air Base, where he saw tanks that Iraqis had rebuilt and watched while they practiced a vehicle sweep at a security checkpoint.

U.S. forces guarded Cheney with weapons at the ready while Iraqi soldiers, who had no weapons, held their arms out as if they were carrying imaginary guns.

"The Syrian border is back under Iraq control now," U.S. Lt. Gen. Marty Dempsey told the vice president, pointing to a map of Iraqi troop locations. "When people say, 'When will Iraq take control of its own security?' the answer truly is it already has."

Yep, that imaginary weapons strategy we're helping the Iraqis out with is sure paying off in a treasure trove of nonviolence & success now

So, when did President DimWitDumbFuckStain get promoted to Emperor DimWitDumbFuckStain?

Defiant in the face of criticism, the Bush administration has portrayed each surveillance initiative as a defense of American freedom. Bush said yesterday that his NSA eavesdropping directives were "critical to saving American lives" and "consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution." After years of portraying an offensive waged largely overseas, Bush justified the internal surveillance with new emphasis on "the home front" and the need to hunt down "terrorists here at home."

Funny, isn't it, how protecting US lives didn't seem to be a big concern back in August 2001, not when President Jr decided that an intelligence document was far less important to deal with than getting back to the White House Crawford branch for his annual month-long vacation from the "hard work" of being President.

Apparently, that disinclination to protect US lives also extends to CIA operatives whose sole job was to track & disrupt the transfer of WsMD to rogue regimes, groups & individuals, with political operatives placing personal payback with petty political grudges far above their duty to keep this country safe

Bush's constitutional argument, in the eyes of some legal scholars and previous White House advisers, relies on extraordinary claims of presidential war-making power. Bush said yesterday that the lawfulness of his directives was affirmed by the attorney general and White House counsel, a list that omitted the legislative and judicial branches of government. On occasion the Bush administration has explicitly rejected the authority of courts and Congress to impose boundaries on the power of the commander in chief, describing the president's war-making powers in legal briefs as "plenary" -- a term defined as "full," "complete," and "absolute."

Not a SINGLE Administration offical is able to point out anywhere in the US Constitution just where the President can unilaterally make laws & order the most massive spying on US citizens this country's ever witnessed.

Interestingly enough, which Administration official did we not see out front on this issue on the Sunday Morning talk shows?

Easy, the one who would be expected to know just exactly where the Constitution supposedly grants this President the rights to Divine rule, unencumbered by any legislative oversight, Attorney General Alberto AKA "Mr. anti-torture is such a Quaint concept"

Wonder how the Administration's Attorney General, or Harriet Miers,were overlooked in selling the idea that the Constitution gives W unlimited rights of kingly privilege?

One of W's most absurd claims is that it's ONLY the terrorists who "hate freedom", in fact, in one of President Jr's first speeches after the September 11 attacks, our unelected, unappointed King actually said

Americans are asking "Why do they hate us?"

They hate what they see right here in this chamber: a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.

Now, let's see which sentence in blue from Bush Jr's Saturday's whinefest jumps out at everyone here, and just how that comports with the claims that it's only the terrorists who hate "Freedom"

The burgeoning use of national security letters coincided with an unannounced decision to deposit all the information they yield into government data banks -- and to share those private records widely, in the federal government and beyond. In late 2003, the Bush administration reversed a long-standing policy requiring agents to destroy their files on innocent American citizens, companies and residents when investigations closed.

Yep, nothing says "Freedom Loving" MORE than saving/not destroying closed investigation files on people, groups & businesses who have done nothing illegal in the least

Interesting too that even though President Jr was far too cowardly & craven to fight for this country when it needed his services during the Vietnam war, W has no problem suddenly finding a spine when it comes to waging war on the US Constitution & the people it's supposed to protect. And at the time W decided to start using our Bill Of Rights as the cheapest grade of toilet paper, the lackey feeding into President Jr's delusions of unfettered arrogance was a hapless theological extremist so out of the mainstream he lost his Senate re-election bid to a dead candidate

No president before Bush mounted a frontal challenge to Congress's authority to limit espionage against Americans. In a Sept. 25, 2002, brief signed by then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, the Justice Department asserted "the Constitution vests in the President inherent authority to conduct warrantless intelligence surveillance (electronic or otherwise) of foreign powers or their agents, and Congress cannot by statute extinguish that constitutional authority."

Now that I think about it, let's add Ashcroft to the list of those who should be able to point out exactly where in the US Constitution this President has the right to have completely unllimited powers to pick & choose which of the Bill Of Rights is still in play, and those which President Jr thinks of as mere guidelines

Friday, December 09, 2005

The following link is from a site that this blog links to, and it's a must read on a daily basis, Pam's House Blend

I hadn't yet gone on a major rant bashing on Gay Bashing groups & individuals, but that changed with the letter she got from one Pete LaBarbera, one of the theological wingnuts I refer to as the Modern Day Pharisees.

Pete decided to get snarky & smug with Pam, and Pam ended up giving lil' Pete a verbal & rhetorical BitchSlapping of most satisfying proportions

Check it out before going further, it will make more sense that way

The Willfully Ignorant Jackasses Bray Again

Increasingly, the homophobic 'tards are ratcheting up their pathetic attempts at making life as miserable as possible for gays, hence the spiteful insistence on trying to get gay marriage, civil unions & domestic patrnership benefits all outlawed now, while they still wield political power

These phobetards know their view is on the way out, logic dictates that the gaybashing Modern Day Pharisees, led by renowned Cartoon Haters James Dobson & Jerry Falwell be mocked, repudiated, scorned & made fun of mercilessly, so as to speed their inevitable demise from the march of history

All these theolgical wingnuts know how to do in the name of their faith is to bully unwilling others, and pitching a royal hissy fit if every facet of their faith isn't lauded above all others

The Modern Day Pharisees screech that homosexuals want "Special Rights", not "Equal Rights"

Well, someone wants "Special Rights", but a closer look at the claim shows it's not gays

If you're gay, you're expected to fulfill your social obligations in the forms of taxes, yet you're not allowed to share fully in the same rights guaranteed other taxpayers, namely, the right to same sex marriage

That's called "Taxation Without Representation"

Funny, I always thought the wingnuts thought taxes were a bad thing, guess that applies only when it's the Modern Day Pharisees tax-exempt lifestyle choice

Looks to me like the Religious right wants their Free Speech rights to be subsidized by those they bash on a constant basis, those they bash for wanting societal rights to go with their societal burden tax-wise

Now one of the more interesting points Petey brought up was

Yes, the IML was and is, in my view, a grotesque event worthy of being exposed. Dare I say that you, too, would be highly offended at some of the activities that are "tolerated" there-such as a booth for the "Waterboys"-men who urinate on and in one another for sexual pleasure? (I'm presuming you find that heinous and deeply disturbing-please correct me if I'm wrong.) So, yes, we walked through the IML vendors' room, and wrote about it. This sort of muckraking journalism-although ours was just a web article--has been going on for years in America......You may disagree with me about the "leather" movement, but surely you would not argue that the subject is not controversial. If you disagree with me, why don't you defend the IML activities (warning: the fact that they are "consensual" is hardly a persuasive argument), rather than making puerile attacks against people like me who oppose and expose them?

Now, I have just one question for LaBarbera

With this much exposure to a lifestyle you obviously find perverse, how are you somehow magically immune to the same so-called "influence" you say others are so quickly corrupted by?

And really, the fact that you made repeated trips to "investigate" this behavior shows you're far more lacking in discipline than anyone else you condemn

And that's another thing Petey could answer, just why is it homophobes think about two men having sex far more often than any gay or bi person I know?

Why such a deep fascination for that which disgusts you Mr LaBarbera?

The faith of the homophobic 'tards is especially weak indeed, with entry into Heaven dependent up stigmatizing & condemning others for the most petty of reasons

If God is wondrous enough to create the Universe and all time, why would something so trifling as a person's sexual orientation be such an outrage against the all-powerful God the Modern Day Pharisees CLAIM to worship?

Pete, it was people like you who made high school an absolute living hell for one of my best friends at that time

My friend got tagged with the "fag" moniker when starting the 7th grade, and until the day he graduated, he was sexually assaulted on an almost regular basis

I was book smart, not street smart, and as such, was too stupid to see the signs of the hell he went through, and it's a shame that I've never forgotten once I understood what happened

In the end, my friend triumphed over those thugs focused on their own selfish desires, underwent a sex-change and is now much happier as a result

That courage, Mr LaBarbera, is what will doom your weak & parasitic faith to the rubbish heap of history where it properly belongs. The courage that comes from facing down willfully ignorant slugs like LaBarbera on a regular basis, and it's an unfound courage in any of the UnChristian Modern Day Pharisees, or their political & media lackeys

Of course, the wingnuts can be entertaining, in the same way that a dog dryhumping it's waterdish is entertaining, as witnessed in the example of the Gay Games "UnWelcoming" proclamation by 5 GOP County Commissioners

The five Republicans on the county board withdrew their names from a routine proclamation welcoming the 2006 Gay Games to Chicago......The Illinois Family Institute is urging Democratic commissioners to do the same......"There's a big difference between tolerating and celebrating homosexuality," said Peter LaBarbera of the group. "For governments to be using taxpayer money and big corporations spending money to sponsor this, we think the average Joe sees that as being just a little bit off."

And speaking of "being just a little bit off"

Why look who's right in the middle of some extremely stupid & empty-headed arrogance, it's Peteyboi LaBarbera

Not to be a spoilsport, but one of the idiots who took LaBarbera's advice ends up looking like a complete imbecile/moron

The Cook County Board of Commissioners approved the ceremonial proclamation without opposition last month as one of a group of routine measures......"I must have been out of the room" when the proclamation came up, said Tony Peraica, one of the five Republicans on the 17-commissioner board.

"I must have been out of the room"

Pete, is someone this vacuous-albeit entertaining-REALLY who you want to have as your political muscle in ANY way, shape or form?

Not only the courage mentioned above will vanquish the likes of LaBarbera to the past, but also the pure "dumb as rocks" willful ignorance shown by so many homophobes

I have not yet heard ONE rational, economically-justifiable, coherent, logical or positive reason gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, all I've seen are hatreds based on the most irrational of prejudices

No one's ever explained how Gays marrying would take money out of the pockets & food off the tables of unwilling others

In short, there is no reason-other than a hatred based on weak religious faith-the homophobes should be allowed to inflict their misery on unwilling others, and what riles up the Modern Day Pharisees is that society is moving away from their petty hatreds

The grip of those like Mr LaBarbera & his ilk is slipping off the levers of political power, and the Modern Day Pharisees know their days of political supremacy are rapidly drawing to a close

All this fuss about these initiatives that would roll back existing protection for Gays, and ban all manners & forms of social recognitions, it's just the most empty & hollow of rhetoric

When the Supreme Court struck down ALL anti-sodomy laws with the Johnson decision, it struck down the basis for all physical prohibitions against same sex marriages

And the young of every generation become more tolerant of homosexuality & gays with each passing day, and the Religious Right, the Modern Day Pharisees & the US Taliban shrieks as it loses more members to the real-world, where sexual orientation is no reason for anyone to get worked up

So to the Modern Day Pharisees

You've Lost

Game Over

Deal With It Now Or Deal With It Later, but you WILL deal with it

Thursday, December 08, 2005

I always hate having to stick up for President Jr, especially when he's under attack by his more theologically extreme base, but in this case, it wouldn't matter who was President, wingnuts this shrill need to just really shut the fuck up

So for once, Mr President, you sit back & let me handle this, after all, who better to bring calm to a public furor than someone with the id of KingCranky

bypass registration with

These wingnuts are all upset that the White House Christmas Cards say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"

Now this kind of spat may seem unseemly-to the poor, sick homeless, incarcerated and elderly-tacky & even a complete repudiation of Christian principles at the exact time of year they're to be lauded most, but by God, Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights President William Donohue knows what's MORE important from a Christian perspective, Words on a mass-mailed greeting card

And it appears that this issue is somehow part of the ever popular-yet completely untrue-"Assault On Christianity" that's got Donohue & Crew so riled up

"This clearly demonstrates that the Bush administration has suffered a loss of will and that they have capitulated to the worst elements in our culture."

"Bush "claims to be a born-again, evangelical Christian. But he sure doesn't act like one," said Joseph Farah, editor of the conservative Web site "I threw out my White House card as soon as I got it."

Actually, this is just another example of former Golden-Boy Karl Rove's political stuttersteps, the inability to coordinate a campaign between the Administration & the Far-right evangelicals, especially frustrating for the Modern Day Pharisees to get so undercut by W's Administration's use of the phrase "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"

Religious conservatives are miffed because they have been pressuring stores to advertise Christmas sales rather than "holiday specials" and urging schools to let students out for Christmas vacation rather than for "winter break." They celebrated when House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) insisted that the sparkling spectacle on the Capitol lawn should be called the Capitol Christmas Tree, not a holiday spruce.

Then along comes a generic season's greeting from the White House, paid for by the Republican National Committee. The cover art is also secular, if not humanist: It shows the presidential pets -- two dogs and a cat -- frolicking on a snowy White House lawn.


Seriously, how in God's name can sick, warped, twisted vermin like Donohue or Farah rail about such a stupid issue when there's so much real suffering in the world, suffering that could be greatly ameliorated if these friggin' religious ninnyhammers would apply one-tenth the energy on helping real people they show when getting irate over a greeting card comment

Does the word "General" fit better in the next passage, or would "Pathetic Jerkoff Always Unhappy Unless All Others Are Miserable" be a better, more accurate description?

But the White House's explanation does not satisfy the groups -- which have grown in number in recent years -- that believe there is, in the words of the Heritage Foundation, a "war on Christmas" involving an "ever-stronger push toward a neutered 'holiday' season so that non-Christians won't be even the slightest bit offended."

One of the generals on the pro-Christmas side is Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association in Tupelo, Miss. "Sometimes it's hard to tell whether this is sinister -- it's the purging of Christ from Christmas -- or whether it's just political correctness run amok," he said. "I think in the case of the White House, it's just political correctness."

Wildmon's supposed "Faith" is a bad joke with no redeeming punchline, a very easy form of theology where one doesn't back up their "Christian" beliefs by showing "Christian" practices

Blathering empty rhetoric of the most mealy-mouthed variety is certainly easier on the pocketbook than actually trying to help out those Christ commanded of all those who chose to follow him, as Wildmon certainly spouts off about here

Wildmon does not give retailers the same benefit of the doubt. This year, he has called for a consumer boycott of Target stores because the chain issued a holiday advertising circular that did not mention Christmas. Last year, he aimed a similar boycott at Macy's Inc., which averted a repeat this December by proclaiming "Merry Christmas" in its advertising and in-store displays.

"It bothers me that the White House card leaves off any reference to Jesus, while we've got Ramadan celebrations in the White House," Wildmon said. "What's going on there?"

Hey, "General", why are you worried about other religions, thinking of converting?

And here's Donohue's weak faith in action, it's not enough for him to believe in something, no, he insists that everyone acknowledge his religious lifestyle choice as valid as their own

At the Catholic League, Donohue had just announced a boycott of the Lands' End catalogue when he received his White House holiday card. True, he said, the Bushes included a verse from Psalm 28, but Psalms are in the Old Testament and do not mention Jesus' birth.

"They'd better address this, because they're no better than the retailers who have lost the will to say 'Merry Christmas,' " he said.


"Ninety-six percent of Americans celebrate Christmas," Donohue said. "Spare me the diversity lecture."

Sure Billiboi, I'll spare you the lecture, just as soon as you spare me your idiocy about why everyone has to kiss your fat ass when it comes to validating religious faith

Why anyone takes these unChristian whackos legitimately I don't understand, as Jesus would be the first to repudiate EVERYTHING these idiots, the Modern Day Pharisees, do in his name

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Once again, one of the most idiotic threats to Constitutional Freedoms rears its foolish head in an attempt to politically pander to as many uninformed voters as possible

The wearisome issue of legally banning the US flag's physical defacement is again on the public agenda, mainly because Hillary Clinton, once a real inspiration to so many of us libs & progressives, has decided to move further to the right

The disappointment & anger at Hillary Clinton's distancing herself from her liberal supporters will be dealt with in another post, but let's deal with the bigger issue here

The most important real-world fact with this legislation is that it's only window dressing of the cheapest sort, only a Constitutional Amendment banning flag defilement for political reasons will pass muster with the Supreme Court

Anything less than a constitutional amendment will get struck down with the first challenge the Supreme Court hears on the issue

Now, the problems such an amendment would create if actually enacted

Which US flag-EXACTLY-is covered by the C.A.?

Is it the current 50 star version only?

How about other counter-culture versions of the flag, say the one with a peace symbol in place of the stars?

How about burning a picture of the US Flag, and if so, does that apply only to color photographs, or b&w and sepia toned pictures as well?

How about drawings, would burning flag drawing be breaking the law here, and if so, would it depend on how well-done the artwork is? And if someone deliberately draws as bad & goofy a picture of the US flag as possible, is that a legally punishable offense?

How is using napkins & paper plates with US Flags on them NOT breaking the law, for that matter, what about cakes decorated as the flag, would it now be a jailable offense to eat such an offering?

Is one allowed to throw away those full-page US flags printed in so many newspapers on July 4th, or are we required to save them, and if so, how reverently must they be stored & maintained to avoid going to jail?

Will the largest groups which burn flags-the Boy Scouts & Veterans Groups-now be prohibited from disposing of old & worn out flags, or will they get a special dispensation to violate the law others would get punished for breaking?

If they get that dispensation, what kind of signal does that send to children, that a group can break the law that applies to others?

How does gutting the 1st Amendment expand freedoms people have died for in combat, how does it make us a safer society, how does it put money in one's pockets & food on one's table?

What is the difference in chemical compositions of flags defiled to make a political point vs those burned for being old & worn out, and since there is none, then how can one's intent possibly be determined with anything short of an uncoerced confession?

Say I videotape myself burning an old, worn out flag, and I state that I'm doing it to both show it proper respect AND to protest a governmental policy, the issue then becomes what was my intent at the moment the flame caught the fabric

I think the term "ThoughtCrime" applies best here

How many people have actually seen a flag burned right in front of their own eyes-NOT on tv, but something witnessed itself?

Not many I'd venture, as this is something that happens so rarely in this country that it makes the news when it does occur, so is it really worth changing the Constitution to prohibit something very few of us ever witness in person?

Politicians who use the flag as a political prop/backdrop at any campaign function defile it far worse than anyone else they condemn on the issue, and when people really think about what such a CA would actually entail, they end up being against the idea

Whcih means all of us who love & use the 1st Amendment have a lot of reaching out & making our case to do with the very constituents the politicians are trying to attract with their cheap, tawdry & politically offensive pandering, we have logic on our side, and we will keep this Amendment from ever making it into the Constitution

Friday, December 02, 2005

I asked this same question over at the Court TV site, and thought I'd do the same here

If you could get any politician, scientist, celebrity-who is opposite yourself politically-to enlist on your side of the aisle for your hardest fought beliefs, who would it be & why?

The more answers & replies, the better, please don't limit to just one choice or post

Oh yeah, to see who I chose, go HERE

Time To Go Rule 21 On The GOP's Ass Again