Happy & Fruitful 2006 to All...

TIBET, Abondoned by Bush

The Natural Beauty of Tibet.(Source of the pretty-picture, and the following description thereof:

Mt. Kailash
It is considered as the most sacred mountain by Buddhists and Hindus alike. Buddhists believe it to be the axis of Mt.Sumeru, the central mountain amidst the four continets of the old concept of world system. Hindus believe it to be the throne of Shiva. Kailash is very beautiful in appearance,thickly covered with snows and hovering dominatingly above its surrounding peaks though its altitude is "only" 6.14 meters.

Completely irrelevant? Okay, perhaps;
I got the idea from Buzzflash
...No appologies, Herb.

"I am a WAR pres'dent, heh heh... Yeah, I'm not a 'dunts'"

Duh...








Herb.

The Powers of King George... UNLIMITED?

What John says, at AMERICAblog:

Seriously. I'd like to know what limit, if any, there is to Bush's commander-in-chief powers. Bush said that the New York Times jeopardized national security and the war on terror by publishing its story revealing that he broke the law by spying on Americans. So, can Bush have New York Times reporters arrested and executed for treason? Or at the very least, when the NYT executive editor met with Bush at the White House to discuss whether or not to run the story, could Bush have simply had the NYT editor shot?I'm serious, I want to know. We've been told that Bush can do anything he wants so long as it's to help the war on terror, so are there any limits?

Good question, Herb.

HISTORY BOOKS, President Clinton, and "impeachment"

AOL-News article includes the following sampling of THREE TEXTBOOKS' coverages of President Clinton & "impeachment." The "scandalous" Presidency...
(that wasn't)
Remember?

1) "Although there was general agreement that the president had lied, Congress was divided over whether his actions justified impeachment."
-- McGraw Hill's middle school textbook, "The American Journey"

2)"...A sorry mess" that diminished Clinton and his rivals. Most Americans did not believe Clinton's "tortured explanations of his behavior..."
-- Pearson Prentice Hall high school textbook, "A History of the United States"

3)"...A personal relationship between the president and a White House intern."
-- A middle school text's explanation of Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

Pretty scary sample...
I can live with #s 1 & 3, but what's up with #2?

I'm not sure Pearson Prentice Hall should be in the "history," or education business(es) at all. Is it just coincidence that the word "tortured" ends up in THEIR U.S. History books--regarding the Clinton Presidency? And, the "sorry mess" was created by the Republican Congress and the media; And the only "historical" significance was this:

If the media, Congress, and the FBI (60 Agents, $100 Million+ wasted) hadn't spent the latter-half of the 90s pursuing FAKE Bill Clinton SCANDALS
(Whitewater, Lewinsky, Jones...), then Osama probably wouldn't have been able (or around) to plan & prepare the 9/11 attacks, which took place NINE MONTHS into G.W. Bush's Done-nothing Presidency.

Bush (And poster-child of INCOMPETENCE, Condi Rice) ignored tey'rism and the real threats we faced at the time... Clinton hadn't ignored 'em! He tried to bomb Osama, and everybody cried out, "wag the dog," accusing Bill Clinton of distracting people from the real-stuff: blowjobs, and bimbos.... Remember? Right! Clinton was waging a War, Congress was chasing a whore!

Congress (with their intelligence-committees, and all) & the media were OBSESSED WITH BLOWJOBS and personal issues with Bill Clinton, and failed the country... B.S., gaw'damnit!

SHYITE! Sorry, gets me a little worked-up, Herb.

"...NO COMMENT..." (Posted by Herb.)

"War on Christmas" Legal Team Gets PUNK'D!

HERE, at buffalobeast.com... there is a hilarious prank-call (transcript) to James Dobson's organization employing 800 attorneys(!) to fight the "War on Christmas." In the Courts, I guess.(?) [EXCERPT BELOW, but read the whole thing @ the link.] Signing off here, Herb.

THE BEAST:
The "War on Christmas" may be nothing but empty right-wing hype, but that hasn’t stopped Über-Christian James Dobson from ramping up his three-year-old "Christmas Project," organizing more than 800 lawyers to defend the baby Jesus. We called to pester his Alliance Defense Fund staff.

Alliance Defense Fund, ADF: Thank you for waiting. How may I direct your call?
:::
BEAST: Well, after I had this incident with my neighbor, I brought it up with the neighbor on the other side, and he told me about Mr. Dobson’s organization and the great things you people were doing.
ADF: Okay, all right, great. Um, okay, and what is the situation that you’re dealing with?
BEAST: Well first of all, praise Jesus
ADF: Okay. Yes.
BEAST: Second of all, all right, this neighbor. I don’t know where he’s from; I don’t know if he’s foreign; I don’t know what but, you know, we see him from time to time, and I say merry Christmas and he kinda gives me the slanty eyes.
ADF: Uh huh.
BEAST: Yeah, so I was wondering what I should do about that in the war on Christmas. Should I – is it ok to launch a preemptive strike, so to speak?
ADF: Well is he – has he done anything, or said anything about you saying “merry Christmas?”
BEAST: Well, you know, he doesn’t speak – his English is sort of broken. I can’t understand; he mumbles.
ADF: Okay.
BEAST: But it’s, you know, a hostile mumble.
ADF: Uh – okay.
BEAST: And he has some sort of decoration – I don’t know what they are, they’re like candles.
ADF: Okay.
BEAST: They’re taking the Christ out of Christmas.
ADF: Right, um, Ian, for this sort of situation, basically what I would probably suggest is, um, you know, whatever you’re doing – I know you want to, you know, keep Christ in Christmas, so we would suggest doing everything you can in your community to make it known that it’s still about Christmas. So, I don’t know if you have decorations up at your house –
BEAST: Well, we’re making a 50-foot – well, we hope to make it a 50-foot ice sculpture Jesus.
ADF: An ice sculpture of Jesus?
BEAST: Yeah.
ADF: And is that going to be in your front yard?
BEAST: Yes sir…ma’am, excuse me.
ADF: It’s okay.
BEAST: Praise Jesus. And you know, we’re only halfway done. We’re about up to the belly button. And, um, you know, I can tell this guy’s already looking at it like he’s gonna rip it down.
ADF: Okay. Well at this point, Ian, we – because we are an organization that intervenes and litigates for specific legal incidences, since there is nothing – you’re not involved in a legal incident right now – there’s not a lot that we can do – um…
BEAST: Well, the thing is uh, you know, we’re making the ice sculpture, so I got the hose out, and were rolling the snow and uh, you know the guy gives me the shifty eyes, and I just say, “Hey, that’s my Jesus.”
ADF: Right.
BEAST: That he’s shifting his eyes at.
ADF: Right.
BEAST: So I sprayed the water on his front steps and he fell.
ADF: And he fell?
BEAST: Yeah. Now he’s suing me, and that’s why I’m calling you.
ADF: Okay, so he’s suing you…
BEAST: Because he’s taking the Christ out of Christmas.
ADF: Okay, but basically he’s suing you because of the water incident and for his injury, correct?
BEAST: Yeah.
ADF: Okay, um.
BEAST: But it all stems from this, uh, religious confrontation.
ADF: Right. No, I understand that, and basically Ian, you know, we litigate and we were set up by Dr. Dobson and other founders to only litigate cases dealing with religious liberty issues and sanctity of life issues. Now, since he hasn’t taken action against your freedom of religion, there’s nothing that we can do in terms of the law to litigate against him
BEAST: Well, one of the legs fell off the Jesus.
ADF: Did he do that?
BEAST: There’s rumors...

There's more here...

Domestic SPYING By BUSH To Be INVESTGATED By Same CONGRESS That DENIED His REQUESTS To Do SAME

New York Times ARTICLE on Bush-domestic-spying Congressional-investigation(s) being planned, HERE; ...Excerpted here:

"Officials Want to Expand Review of Domestic Spying..."
New York Times, By Eric Lichtblau, WASHINGTON, Dec. 24

...Members of the Judiciary Committee have already indicated that they intend to conduct oversight hearings into the president's legal authority to order domestic eavesdropping on terrorist suspects without a warrant. But Congressional officials said Saturday that they would probably seek to expand the review to include the disclosure that the security agency, using its access to giant phone "switches," had also traced and analyzed phone and Internet traffic in much larger volumes than what the Bush administration had acknowledged. "We want to look at the entire program, an in-depth review, and this new data-mining issue is certainly a part of the whole picture," said a Republican Congressional aide
:::
The White House declined to comment Saturday on the security agency program or the use of data-mining, saying it would not discuss intelligence operations.
"The administration will aggressively fight the war on terror in an effort to protect the American people while at the same time upholding the civil liberties of the American people," said Allen Abney, a White House spokesman. "The president is doing both of these things and will continue to do both of these things."
Defenders of the program within the federal government say that the security agency's broad analytical searches and data-mining, combined with actual eavesdropping, are an essential part of detecting and preventing terror attacks.
And they say the president is well within his legal authority to order such programs, because of his inherent constitutional power and because of Congressional authorization in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that permitted him to use "all necessary and appropriate force" to fight terrorism.

No comment, Herb.

"President" Bush... Baby!

Spoiled BRAT PRESIDENT Bush Wants To Be EXEMPT From Rules... Again!

Bush junior is SO ACCUSTOMED to not having to play by the same rules as everyone else, that he just repeatedly expects everyone to ACCEPT LIES, and do his bidding without question. Now he doesn't like the media EXPOSING his administration's LIES & DECEPTION. He doesn't like getting-caught breakin' the law... see? So, here's Our coward bubble-boy President BEGGING the media to STOP embarrassing him! "Please, stop catching me lying," I guess? It's pretty LAME as well, using National "Security," again, to shield himself from REPORTERS (finally!) reporting.

(Bush Sr.)Daddy, or the Saudis Royals have always bent-the-rules for Junior...

Like gettin' IN to Yale...
Or gettin' OUT, of Viet Nam...

"BUSH PRESSES (NATIONAL-MEDIA NEWSPAPER)
EDITORS ON (CLAIMS OF) SECURITY(!)"

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 26, 2005;

President Bush has been summoning newspaper editors lately in an effort to prevent publication of stories he considers damaging to national security.The efforts have failed, but the rare White House sessions with the executive editors of The Washington Post and New York Times are an indication of how seriously the president takes the recent reporting that has raised questions about the administration's anti-terror tactics.

Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, would not confirm the meeting with Bush before publishing reporter Dana Priest's Nov. 2 article disclosing the existence of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe used to interrogate terror suspects. Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times, would not confirm that he, publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Washington bureau chief Philip Taubman had an Oval Office sit-down with the president on Dec. 5, 11 days before reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau revealed that Bush had authorized eavesdropping on Americans and others within the United States without court orders...

Disasters happen in slow-motion when
you're right in the middle of 'em.
It's--, Herb.

Presidential BOOTLICKER, Alito, N.Y. Times Editorial

Pieces posted without comment, Herb.

"Alito's Zeal for Presidential Power"

New York Times - Editorial,
Published: December 24, 2005

"With the Bush administration claiming sweeping and often legally baseless authority to detain and spy on people, judges play a crucial role in underscoring the limits of presidential power. When the Senate begins hearings next month on Judge Samuel Alito, President Bush's Supreme Court nominee, it should explore whether he understands where the Constitution sets those limits. New documents released yesterday provide more evidence that Judge Alito has a skewed view of the allocation of power among the three branches - skewed in favor of presidential power.
:::
(In another Reagan-era) memo released yesterday, Judge Alito made another bald proposal for grabbing power for the president. He said that when the president signed bills into law, he should make a "signing statement" about what the law means. By doing so, Judge Alito hoped the president could shift courts' focus away from "legislative intent" - a well-established part of interpreting the meaning of a statute - toward what he called "the President's intent."
:::
These memos are part of a broader pattern of elevating the presidency above the other branches of government. In his judicial opinions, Judge Alito has shown a lack of respect for Congressional power - notably when he voted to strike down Congress's ban on machine guns as exceeding its constitutional authority. He has taken a cramped view of the Fourth Amendment and other constitutional provisions that limit executive power.
The Supreme Court and the lower federal courts have had to repeatedly pull the Bush administration back when it exceeded its constitutional powers..."

Happy Hanukkah AND Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas friends,And... Happy Hanukkah!

HANUKKAH: The 8-day "Festival of Lights," begins on Christmas Day ihis year! The two Holidays haven't coincided the way they do TONIGHT... in "fiddy" years! (50) That's a fact. Correct me in comments if I got something wrong, Herb.

I thought about Jesus today, while celebrating Christmas w/ friends and family. Jesus was Jewish. Then, I thought about Bill O'Reilly's distraction "war..."

I concluded Jesus would be pissed at Fox(fakes)News & Bill O'Reilly for hijacking His birthday for their own commercial & political purposes. I mean, "Jesus Christ," it's a Holy day! (holiday) Actually, Jeez' was a chill-dude; I think He'd say "happy holidays" and hope NOT to offend a stranger. So, you lose, Bill!O'Reilly lost the war... "HAPPY HOLIDAYS," Herb.

BUSH IMPEACHMENT? Yes! So says Barron's Weekly... (A corporate - conservative rag!)

BARRON'S WEEKLY?
Yeah, that's right...
(Bee-otch!)
Impeach Bush?
YES Sir:Impeach him; or as they suggest unrealistically, have Congress approve of EXACTLY what Preident Bush and the NSA have beeen doing SECRETLY (and illegally) for 4 years or so; After a FULL-INVESTIGATION of course:

Legalize stuff forever (and for future Dem. Presidents?) like:
LISTENING TO YOUR PHONE CALLS! And worse, data-mining YOUR mail, and internet-use, etc. -- exactly the powers/projects Congress has REJECTED when the White House requested them.
[Did you get that? They ask (Congress) for permission to abuse-power or break-the-rules, & get rejected, by Congress or the Courts... Then they do it anyways, SECRETLY and illegally. On multiple-instances and issues.]
Example: Remember Nixon's-own John Poindexter was gonna analyze YOUR credit card bills, phone records, and the like, for teyrist spending-patterns? That job was publicly-canned (with Poidexter), but secretly given to the FBI or someone. They've been doin' it anyways. [That's the data-mining Times story (I think).]

Congress will never make a Domestic-Spying-Is-Cool Law, so Barron's is really just suggesting that bush be impeached. Impeach President George W. Bush... probably have to be the NEXT Congress. Excerpt from an AMERICAblog post on the Barron's Editorial

(BARRON'S:)Willful disregard of a law is potentially an impeachable offense. It is at least as impeachable as having a sexual escapade under the Oval Office desk and lying about it later. The members of the House Judiciary Committee who staged the impeachment of President Clinton ought to be as outraged at this situation. They ought to investigate it, consider it carefully and report either a bill that would change the wiretap laws to suit the president or a bill of impeachment...


(John, AMERICAblog:) ...I really appreciate the option Barron's has presented. Either you're with the Constitution or you're against it. If Congress thinks Bush has the power to do what he did, then pass legislation that explicitly lets him spy on us without any judicial check - stop playing games with this inferred and implied crap. Give him the power directly and let the American people know it (then see what happens). And if you don't want him to have the power, impeach him. But there's no in between.

That's right, no in between. So, White House: Cut the legalistic, terr'ism-emergency, secret-suspend separation-of-powers, wartime-classified, super-secret A.G.-approved(!)Eexecutive branch power-grab, "liberal media" conspiracy-lie, corrupt go-fuck-yourself (dick), lying-cheating-stealing,
stupid, greasy neocon pussy-political
decrepit pretend-intellectual, elitist...
EXCUSE MAKING and LYING and PROPAGANDA...
speeches-confuse-the-peasants approach
you've been trying for... forever!
Not workin' well these days, eh?
AMEN, BROTHER(JOHN); and Merry "X-mas," All, Herb.

"BUSH'S FALSE CHOICES..." from Boston Globe's Ellen Goodman

"BUSH'S FALSE CHOICES" - The Boston Globe
-- Ellen Goodman -- December 23, 2005. --

SO IT COMES DOWN TO
September 11, 2001.
AGAIN... [?]
The President has drawn
a great dividing-line
through the Country,
separating his supporters from his critics... AGAIN!This time, those who see a presidency run amok are not just labeled "defeatists." They are considered amnesiacs.
This time, those who oppose torture are diagnosed with short-term memory loss. Those who are outraged at domestic snooping are people who have forgotten to be afraid.

The president's "humble" speech from the Oval Office contained the inevitable line: "September the 11th, 2001, required us to take every emerging threat to our country seriously." His decidedly unhumble wrestling with the media on the subject of domestic spying had no less than 10 references to "this new threat [that] required us to think and act differently."
:::
We have been handed yet another in an endless series of false choices. Those who don't blindly trust the president are dismissed as amnesia victims. Americans who don't connect the dots from 9/11 to Iraq or spying or torture are cast as actors living in a foolish, fearless, fantasy world. Indeed, 9/11 was the day the president became the commander in chief. The words he often repeats were spoken to him by a rescue worker at the World Trade Center: "Whatever it takes."
If there are Americans who have actually forgotten the attacks in all their searing horror, I don't know any. I remember the weeks when I would wake up and reach for the remote to see if we'd caught Osama. When did that expectation fade? I remember the just pursuit of Al Qaeda into its safety zone, Afghanistan. And the satisfaction in overthrowing the Taliban.But gradually, 9/11 became the all-purpose excuse for . . . whatever it takes. The war in Iraq was conflated with the war on terror, and preemptive strikes were launched against weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist. In "The Assassin's Gate," George Packer, a liberal hawk, tries to assess why the United States really did invade Iraq. "It still isn't possible to be sure -- and this remains the most remarkable thing about the Iraq War," he writes. "Iraq is the Rashomon of wars," and all he can conclude is that it "has something to do with September 11."
:::
Those who criticize the commander in chief wonder if he is the one who's forgotten 9/11. Has he forgotten when the country was united? Has he forgotten when the world was on our side? Has he forgotten that we were the good guys?

As for fear? My generation grew up under the threat of a mushroom cloud. There is an old theatrical adage that when there's a gun on stage in the first act, it will go off by the third act. We have no false sense of security in this dangerous world. Nor do we embrace the equally false belief that curtailing liberty automatically makes us safer. We have seen how the promise of protection becomes a protection racket.

"Whatever it takes" does not mean "whatever the president says it takes." It does not mean becoming our own worst enemies. It does not mean approving torture or domestic spying. And it most certainly does not mean watching silently as a commander in chief takes on the uniform of a Generalissimo...

HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
And
SEASON'S GREETINGS...
Merry Christmas...
Happy Channukah,
& Bestest Festivus,
Herb.

Donald Rumsfeld Blubbering (Drunk?) in Baghdad

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, still in Iraq(hiding in the Green Zone), said in another blathering-speech, where he sounded drunk and/or drugged (I think he was trying to be emotional - faker!):

"...Our free way of life, is what makes America special."

What an idiot. Thanks, Dipshit! ...but YOU are not really in any position to speak for Americans, or Our "way of life." Or freedom!

Frankly, I think what "makes America special," (obviously) is the PRUDENCE of our leaders...And the fact that WE DON'T TORTURE...
Not even our ENEMIES
in wartime. Oops!
Um, uh...

Well, "prudent leadership?"
Damnit. Nevermind, Herb.

WEASELS! Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney... "Cut and Run" much?

Rumsfeld's "announcement" in Iraq, that Bush is Cuttin' & Runnin',
came at about Midnight Eastern (Late Friday Night!), Christmas Eve!
Interesting. Weasels...It's almost as though they tried to slip it under-the-(end of the week)-rug, while everyone was X-mas-shopping (Read: waiting in traffic, parking, waiting;).

That's all. Merry Christmas, Herb.
(A biscuit for Bill, 'tis-the-season!)

Reuters: EVOLUTION Is 2005's Top Scientific Breakthrough [SERIOUSLY!]

"Evolution Is 2005's Top Scientific Breakthrough"
By Deborah Zabarenko, Reuters, excerpt:

...Wide-ranging research published this year, including a study that showed a mere 4 percent difference between human and chimpanzee DNA, built on Charles Darwin's landmark 1859 work "The Origin of Species" and the idea of natural selection, the journal's editors wrote."Amid this outpouring of results, 2005 stands out as a banner year for uncovering the intricacies of how evolution actually proceeds," they wrote. "Ironically, also this year, some segments of American society fought to dilute the teaching of even the basic facts of evolution..."

IRONIC... There's more at the link above; And HERE: Top-10, 2005 Science Stories, Herb.

BUSH: "Cowards Cut and Run, Marines Don't!" Someone, uh...

Remember this cupcake? Uhhh, Yes-sir.
More embarrassing?
(Not too likely.)
"Goose-gander?"
Roger that...
Some party.
Some gal,
Herb.

Bush & Rumsfeld - CUTTING & RUNNING! They've NO RESOLVE!

On Fox News, they kept calling it a "drawdown" of troops. Whatever! That means cut-and-run!

FOX Headline: "Rumsfeld Says Troops in Iraq to Be Cut"

...RUMSFELD on Friday ANNOUNCED the first of what is likely to be A SERIES of U.S. combat troop drawdowns in Iraq in 2006.Rumsfeld, addressing U.S. troops (in Iraq), said PRESIDENT BUSH has AUTHORIZED new CUTS... Rumsfeld did not reveal the exact size of the troop cuts, but Pentagon officials have said it could be as much as 7,000 combat troops. The Pentagon has not announced a timetable for troop reductions, but indications are that the force could be cut significantly by the end of 2006....

They Lost the War! They're cutting and running. It doesn't matter if they say they won, or whatever. The Troops did win, but BUSH, CHENEY NEOCONS, & RUMSFELD didn't know HOW to win, so THEY LOST! They're cowards, they never fought, just wanted to play FDR or MacArtur or something... They created a complete DISASTER in Iraq, and now it's UNPOPULAR... so Bush is cutting-and-running. PERIOD!

Nothing has changed in Iraq -- except for-the-WORST! The election was a sham/disaster - hardliners prevailing. The Iraqi "Security" Forces didn't "stand up." So,
AGAIN, NOTHING HAS CHANGED,Except Bush's approval-polls and the approaching Congressional miterm-elections...

"Artificial Timelines Set By Politicians In D.C.,"

Exactly what Bush said he'd NEVER do...
[in response to Murtha (I think)?].
They've RUINED Our military; Our reputation; Our strength, standing, & solvency. They LOST their DREAM f**king OIL war! Thanks, Dick! We're screwed... Herbal wisdom: buy a bicycle! The Middle East! (Instability, anyone?) Now THEY ARE CUTTIN' & RUNNIN'. Well, Halliburton had a(ahem) good year... [that'll help out the economy, right? (yeah, of Barbados)].

Bush'll probably do exactly what Murtha suggested a month ago, BUT claim it's his idea, and that he WON (something) the WAR. Aye, Herb.

"What's WRONG With The ECONOMY?" REPORT from Economic Policy Institute

December 21, 2005 | EPI Policy Memorandum
By EPI President Lawrence Mishel and
Policy Director Ross Eisenbrey

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE ECONOMY?

1. Profits are up, but the wages and the incomes of average Americans are down.2. More and more people are deeper and deeper in debt.


3. Job-creation hasn't kept up with population-growth, & the employment-rate has fallen sharply.

4. Poverty is on the rise.

5. Rising health care costs are eroding families' already declining income.

See the one-page EPI Report here for data on the conclusions they reached. Season's Greetings, Herb.

"Congress EXPLICITLY REJECTED The Specific Authority BUSH Now Claims he was Implicitly Given," speaketh Atrios.

Yesss... Grasshopper, Atrios is wise, and Eschaton is wisdom... [and good links!]

The Bush administration requested, and Congress rejected, war-making authority "in the United States" in negotiations over the joint resolution passed days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to an opinion article by former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) in today's Washington Post...Daschle's disclosure challenges[TJ-edit: "destroys"] a central legal argument offered by the White House...
in defense of the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens and permanent residents. It suggests that Congress refused explicitly to grant authority that the Bush administration now asserts is implicit in the resolution....

Doesn't matter if Daschle's a Pink Fairy, or whatever YOU SAID, [{;-)], He was the Leader of the Senate (maj./ min.), so they had to tell him stuff.

(W.H. requests a MULLIGAN?)
Karl? Cancel that trip
to the Hamptons!
-Herb.

The "WAR ON TERRIERS," see, it's different from all other "wars." or: ...Dog-blog Tuesday?

See, the ENEMY in this WAR,
"doesn't play by the rules."

Doesn't wear a uniform, doesn't always carry a "weapon," so it's hard to identify 'em. It's a super-secret "cyber-sorta-war," too. "They use the internets to attack us," said the President... "We're just gonna kill 'em! Hunt 'em down, wher'ver they live..." ('long's there's oil).They hate our freedom! Kill 'em all. Then the war'll be over.

Or, if a Democrat gets elected President. Then it'd be over... Definitely!

RE: THIS POST: The Hardball(msnbc) host mis-spoke ("war on terrier"), and I coudln't resist some doggie pics; a bad pun.

But, there is an important analogy here:
-----Terror v. Terrier-----
Discuss in comments, Herb.

Respected FISA Judge Resigns Over Bush's Secret & Illegal Domestic-Spying (AP story)

ASSOCIATED PRESS article:

A federal judge has resigned from a special court set up to oversee government surveillance, apparently in protest of President Bush's secret authorization of a domestic spying program on people with suspected terrorist ties.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson would not comment Wednesday on his resignation, but The Washington Post reported that it stemmed from deep concern that the surveillance program Bush authorized was legally questionable and may have tainted the work of the Court...

FOR SHAME! As someone has asked,
"Who's wearing the blue-dress now?"'Be funny if it weren't so scary, Herb.

MSNBC Internet Poll, via Buzzflash.com...

Check it out via buzzflash links above or right...

Do you believe President Bush's actions justify impeachment? [ * 50326 responses]
88% XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX YES,
between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.

4% X No,
like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high crimes and misdemeanors."

7% XX No,
the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.

1% x I don't know.

* On Thursday at 2AM Eastern, Not a scientifically valid survey... But seems just about right, Herb.

I dare ANYONE to say, in "Comments," that they are PROUD of President George W. Bush... He's a National DISGRACE!
I bet there won't be any comments! [{;-)]

CHRISTMAS ICICLES! Christicles!!! "Merry Christmas," damnit!

Those ICICLE light that everyone has-up now? They're CHRISTMAS ICICLES! Or "Christicles," They are about Jesus, don't lie.
And don't say, "happy holidays," if you have 'em hangin'.
Tabloid reporter Bill O'Reilly and Fox News supports this change, and will be assisting in enforcement. And, sorry, (y)our Jewish friends cannot use them. No! Nope. Fox News, Birth of Jesus! "la-la-la-la-la-lala." Je-sus!

Thanks, for your help in fighting this War on Winter-stuff. ...Happiest of Holidays, Herb.

"A FESTIVUS for the rest-of-us!" (bill o'reilly)

And a HAPPY FESTIVUS... TO ALL!
('specially Fox's Bill O'Really)
Best, Herbert Walker.An explanation...maybe?

...
FRANK: And at the Festivus dinner, you gather your family around, and you tell them all the ways they have disappointed you over the past year.
KRAMER: Is there a tree?
FRANK: No! Instead, there's A POLE:
It requires NO-DECORATION.
I - find -- tinsel...
Distracting!
KRAMER: Frank, this new holiday of yours is scratching me right where I itch.
FRANK: Let's do it then! Festivus is back! I'll get the pole out of the crawl space...

[Note: Always use an ALUMINUM POLE -- for its strength-to-weight ratio.]

Protection from unreasonable search and seizure VIOLATED

...
Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure...

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.

The U.S. Constitution & The Bill Of Rights, [here], used to matter...

Three more years? Pray not, Herb.

Depends What Your Definition of "EQUAL" Is...

"THREE COEQUAL BRANCHES
OF GOVERNMENT..."

The founding fathers, whose brilliant design for the federal government was based on three coequal branches, would be HORRIFIED...

King George, continues his reign, Herb.

IMPEACHMENT? Okay, damnit!

See AMERICAblog -- for this story... What follows below is an excerpt(MY EMPH.) of an excerpt (from Kevin Drum's blog).

...Bush signed an order allowing the NSA to spy on US citizens without a warrant.

This is AGAINST THE LAW... the law forbids warrantless surveillance of US citizens, and it provides procedures to be followed in emergencies

Bush's order is arguably UNCONSTITUTIONAL as well: it seems to violate the fourth amendment...

I think that IMPEACHMENT is a trauma for the country, and that it should only be considered in extreme cases. Moreover, I think that the fact that Clinton was impeached raises the bar...

And for a President to order violations of the law meets my criteria for impeachment... This is exactly what got Nixon in trouble: he ordered his subordinates to obstruct justice... (I)t's not as though warrants are hard to get, or the law makes no provision for emergencies. Bush could have followed the law had he wanted to. He chose to set it aside...If the New York Times report is true, then Bush should be IMPEACHED.

John [link], over at
AMERICAblog agrees...
I concur, Herb.