LEFT is RIGHT (blogging against The Bush-war) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
###
Iraq War Cost
Buy it Here for $12.95 ::::: MY PROFILE ::::: VIDEO: When the Good Guys Do NOTHING Welcome to the New World Order Truth, War & Consequences In the Name of Freedom Oreo Calculator Army of One Remind Us One Year THANKS ESSAY/SITE: Bush's 40/IRAQ/SOTU/OTHER Lies A Declaration of Progressive Principles A Declaration of Impeachment World's Leading Terrorist Why Bush Invaded Iraq Coalition Deaths in Iraq Altruism is Out of Focus Official Bush Lie Outlet The Devil's Handbook Third World Traveler Paying for Wal-mart Those Elusive WMDs Ongoing Scandals The Bush Record Bush Scorecard Who Served Halliburton AWOL Evil
I reserve the right to publish your e-mail.
Archives My Ecosystem Details Who's Linking to Left is Right Who links to me? Who's on Left is Right right now # Visits by day of month Most Recent Visitors Recent Visitors by Location United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights Humanist Manifesto III The Brand New Bag Books about the Iraq War
|
Front Pages / 10 x 10 / Open Secrets / VillageVoice / The New Standard / The Hill / Washington Note
|
More Part D Problems There was a flurry of disappointing news this week for those hoping Part D would be a success. Word of seniors falling into the doughnut hole earlier than expected first made headlines in the Cape Cod Times. The story was based on letters that seniors have been horrified to receive from their drug plans. Many seniors had been under the false impression that only individual-out-of-pocket costs paid by plan members counted toward the initial coverage limit of $2,250, which is where the doughnut hole begins. However, this was not correct. The truth is that the insurance companies’ costs also count toward the initial coverage limit of $2,250 – meaning that the doughnut hole is being reached much sooner. Seniors have therefore already begun footing the entire bill for their drug costs, while also paying an insurance premium. To make matters worse, the news goes against what many had been told previously. Even calls to the Medicare Part D hotline resulted in different answers. In addition, the New York Times reported that hundreds of thousands of letters were being sent to beneficiaries enrolled in more than one drug plan, a result of beneficiaries switching plans and errors in disenrollment records. The letters inform participants they will be dropped from one plan and retain coverage under the most recent plan in which they were enrolled, leaving many to fret over the confusion this will cause. Non-English speakers are finding it impossible to get their prescriptions through the Part D program, according to the Los Angeles Times. Faced with the difficulties in obtaining prescriptions at pharmacies all over the country, non-English speakers are being told there are no available translators when they call their drug plan providers with questions. “Proponents of Part D don’t want to extend the May 15 deadline, but clearly there is still a crisis in the making,” said Ruben Burks, Secretary-Treasurer of the Alliance. “The program has been in effect for 3 months now. If the problems have not yet been worked out, I doubt the problems can be solved in just one month.” |
Funny how after three years of war in Iraq, war supporters still can't answer these three simple questions: 3. Why don't those who bloviate about "supporting" and "honoring" the troops against an enemy they think threatens Western civilization actually, you know, put on combat boots and join them? |
"In fact, much of the animosity and violence we now see is the legacy of Saddam Hussein." - - - President Bush |
"Well, you know, that's the problem in America, we're always having elections." - - - Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn |
Indeed, what we are witnessing with the Republican Party is a case of separation anxiety. They know they have to distance themselves from the President--after all, he is one of the most unpopular Presidents ever. But gosh darn it, they just...can't...do it. Because without the specter of Bush looming over them, Republicans feel naked and vulnerable. Little do they know that specter casts over the entire party a dark shadow of discontent and incompetence. Let them cling to Bush for their political lives. Let them cling to the sinking ship and hope they can keep their head above water. If this President keeps up his ratings free-fall and his dangerous incompetence, Republicans will be gasping for air come election day." - - - Georgia10 |
"Bush's government is the first in our history in which there are no dissenting voices and no debate. Uniformity of opinion is more characteristic of a dictatorial government than a conservative one. Bush's government is all of one mind, because all important positions are held by neoconservatives. "Neoconservative is a deceptive term. It means "new conservatives," but there is nothing conservative about neocons. Neoconservatives believe in imposing their agenda on other countries--the antithesis of American conservatism. "....real conservatives believe in conserving the Constitution, government accountability, and civil liberties, and avoiding foreign entanglements. Judging by its behavior and its statements, the Bush administration stands completely outside the conservative tradition." - - - Paul Craig Roberts |
"....Unfortunately, the US didn't take advantage of the opportunity to withdraw during 2005. Decision makers mistook the controlled chaos enabled by the use of militias for progress towards their maximal goals in the country. That illusion officially ended with the attack on the Samara shrine (a form of social system disruption, likely a coup de grace by Zarqawi). After that event, the fragile structure of the system flew out of control as Shiite militias began to ethnically cleanse Sunnis. "The US is now caught between the militias and the guerrillas and the situation will deteriorate quickly. "Here's a likely scenario for how this will play out: deeper entrenchment within US bases (to limit casualties) and pledges of neutrality (Rumsfeld) will prove hollow. Ongoing ethnic slaughter will force US intervention to curtail the militias. Inevitably, this will increase tensions with the militias and quickly spin out of control. Military and police units sent to confront the militias will melt down (again), due to conflicting loyalties. Several large battles with militias will drive up US casualties sharply. Supply lines to US bases from Kuwait will be cut. Protesters will march on US bases to demand a withdrawal. Oil production via the south will be cut (again), bringing Iraqi oil exports to a halt. Meanwhile, the government will continue its ineffectual debate within the green zone, as irrelevant to the reality on the ground in the country as ever. Unable to function in the mounting chaos and facing a collapse in public support for the war, the US military will be forced to withdraw in haste. It will be ugly. "UPDATE: After I wrote this, there was news that the US intervened by attacking a gathering point for Shiite militias in Baghdad. An Imam was killed along with 16 others. There was also a raid on an Interior Ministry prison (Badr). The scenario begins..." - - - John Robb |
"You don't want to act, or even talk, alone. . . you don't want to 'go out of your way to make trouble.' . . . But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves, when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. . . .You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things your father . . . could never have imagined." - - - Milton Mayer |
Ben Domenech Resigns In the past 24 hours, we learned of allegations that Ben Domenech plagiarized material that appeared under his byline in various publications prior to washingtonpost.com contracting with him to write a blog that launched Tuesday. An investigation into these allegations was ongoing, and in the interim, Domenech has resigned, effective immediately. When we hired Domenech, we were not aware of any allegations that he had plagiarized any of his past writings. In any cases where allegations such as these are made, we will continue to investigate those charges thoroughly in order to maintain our journalistic integrity. Plagiarism is perhaps the most serious offense that a writer can commit or be accused of. Washingtonpost.com will do everything in its power to verify that its news and opinion content is sourced completely and accurately at all times. We appreciate the speed and thoroughness with which our readers and media outlets surfaced these allegations. Despite the turn this has taken, we believe this event, among other things, testifies to the positive and powerful role that the Internet can play in the the practice of journalism. We also remain committed to representing a broad spectrum of ideas and ideologies in our Opinions area. Jim Brady Executive Editor, washingtonpost.com |
"I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them." - - - Adlai E. Stevenson Jr. |
"One of the very first things my parents taught my four brothers and me was to learn how to kneel and what to do while you are kneeling." - - - Maria Shriver, wife of California Governor Schwarzenegger |
"....if my happiness were based solely on the objective conditions of my particular life -- work, social relations, health, adventure, material comfort, etc. -- I could, without hesitation, say that I'm very happy. But I'm blessed/cursed with a social conscience that assails my tranquility. Reading the hundred varieties of daily horrors in my morning newspaper -- the cruelty of man, the cruelty of nature, the cruelty of chance -- I'm frozen in despair and anger. Often, what makes it hardest to take is that my own government, at home and abroad, directly and indirectly, is responsible for more of the misery than any other human agent. I would have been incredulous, during the first half of my life, to think that one day my own government would scare me so. But if I were a conservative, I could take great comfort, even happiness, in convincing myself that it's largely "the bad guys" who are being hurt and that all these horrors are for the purpose of extending democracy, freedom, and other joys to the dark corners of the world. And at a profit." - - - William Blum |
"The Iraq War, if anything, is a reflection of the total abrogation of constitutional responsibility and process by the Congress of the United States. As a result, the President has led a nationdown the path of illegal war of aggression which has damaged America's reputation abroad, and its very fabric here at home. The Republican-controlled Congress has done little to stop this collective march towards national self-destruction, rubber-stamping the president's illegal actions with little regard to either the rule of law or Congress's status as a second but equal branch of government. |
Most bank credit cards are tied to large multi-national banks with connections to shady or unethical dealings, support for environmentally-poor companies, fees that rip off the card-holders, or other unsavory characteristics. Check out this article on some "good" credit card issuers.
President Bush today announced that the United States is taking its first direct action against bird flu--we are bombing the Canary Islands. |
QUESTION: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President — your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is: Why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, your Cabinet officers, former Cabinet officers, intelligence people and so forth — but what's your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil, the quest for oil. It hasn't been Israel or anything else. What was it? QUESTION: And ... BUSH: Hold on for a second, please. Excuse me. Excuse me. No president wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. When we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people, that we will do everything in our power to protect our people. Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy, and that's why I went into Iraq. (CROSSTALK) BUSH: Hold on for a second. Excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al-Qaida. QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) BUSH: Helen, excuse me. That's where — Afghanistan provided safe haven for al-Qaida. That's where they trained, that's where they plotted, that's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans. I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council. That's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, Disarm, disclose or face serious consequences. And therefore, we worked with the world. We worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny the inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did. And the world is safer for it. |
"Much of the conservative base makes a habit of denying scientific reality and arguing that the Constitution is meaningless when applied to George Bush or Dick Cheney. Millions of them fervently hope and sincerely believe that any day now, they and a few selected animated corpses straight from the grave will be sucked up right out of their clothes, and plopped onto heavenly ringsides seats to gleefully watch the eternal torture of every man, women, and child left behind. Tell me again, who are the crazy ones?" |
A majority of agencies received low marks from a congressional committee Thursday on their level of compliance with a federal computer system security act, but there's growing criticism that the law is ineffective. The 24 agencies graded by the House Government Reform Committee for their compliance with the 2002 Federal Information Security Management Act fell largely in either the lowest or highest categories, with the government earning an overall grade of D+, the same mark as last year. Eight agencies received Fs: the departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Interior, State and Veterans Affairs. Another five agencies received Ds: the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the departments of Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, Justice and Treasury. Five agencies were awarded A+ grades: the Agency for International Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Labor Department, Office of Personnel Management and Social Security Administration.... |
....As McCain left the Peabody Hotel on Saturday to tour the hurricane-damaged Gulf Coast, he was matter-of-fact about his steadfast support for the president. "We elected him, we need him, he needs to do well and the country needs him," McCain said in an interview. "With all the challenges, all of these things that are going on, including slow progress in Iraq, we need to show our support. It's easy to support somebody when they're up. That's why I did it. If he had been up, I wouldn't have emphasized it nearly as much. You've got to rally the troops." .... |
On Wednesday, March 1st, 2006, in Annapolis at a hearing on the proposed Constitutional Amendment to prohibit gay marriage, Jamie Raskin, professor of law at AU, was requested to testify. At the end of his testimony, Republican Senator Nancy Jacobs said: "Mr. Raskin, my Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman. What do you have to say about that?" Raskin replied: "Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible." The room erupted into applause. |
"....IEDs, mentioned a whopping 26 times in the president’s [recent] speech, have obviously come to replace that nonexistent WMD threat as the centerpiece of Bush’s Iraq policy. We will stop them, he says, by bumping anti-IED-related spending by a factor of 22, from $150 million in 2004 to $3.3 billion. 'We’re putting the best minds in America to work on this effort,' Bush said. "Why not put a few of them to work on figuring how to extract the U.S. military from Iraq instead? After all, that is where all the IEDs happen to be exploding. "But, of course, this alternative, to stop making U.S. troops targets in the midst of a raging civil war in a Muslim country that the United States has no business occupying, was summarily dismissed by our president. "'[M]y decisions on troop levels will be made based upon the conditions on the ground and on the recommendations of our military commanders, not artificial timetables set by politicians here in Washington, D.C.,' he said. "Has the president never read our Constitution, which mandates civilian control over the military? Does he not grasp that he is himself a Washington politician? How can you effectively sell democracy to the world when you mock it so contemptuously at home? "You can’t. Not until the public and its representatives force this administration to change its disastrous course can we begin to restore international respect for the American political system that Bush has so masterfully subverted. ---- Robert Scheer |
A 2004 study by the University of California at Berkeley Labor Center found that Wal-Mart employees’ reliance on public assistance programs, including health care, costs California $86 million annually, with health-related costs accounting for $32 million. According to the study, 23 percent fewer Wal-Mart employees participate in the company’s health care plan than is typical for employees of large retailers in general. And Wal-Mart families use 40 percent more in taxpayer-funded health care services and 38 percent more in non-health public services (food stamps, Earned Income Tax Credit, subsidized school lunches and housing) than the families of all large retail workers. The study concluded that if other California retailers followed Wal-Mart’s example when it comes to wages and benefits, it would cost state taxpayers an additional $410 million annually to provide public assistance to workers. While the company evades costs for worker health care, Wal-Mart has benefited from at least $48.5 million in taxpayer financed economic assistance in California since 1991. The Wal-Mart Tax: Shifting Heath Care Costs to Taxpayers 3 California has had to address significant budget shortfalls over the past several fiscal years, and future gaps are predicted through 2010. Medi-Cal spending has been on the rise over the past several budget years, and more than 1 million additional people have enrolled in the program since the 2000-2001 fiscal year. Spending on the program increases by 10 percent per year as a result of increased costs and enrollment. Over the past two fiscal years, California has cut Medicaid benefits and taken a variety of other steps to control costs. |
The gravest danger our nation faces lies at the crossroads of pornography and technology: weapons of mass distraction Our right to privacy and the government's propensity for overbroad investigations were the subject of considerable debate earlier today when attorneys for Google and the Department of Justice clashed over the government`s demands for access to the company's search requests.... After a few hours argument the court said it intends to force Google to cough up some data, a victory that will no doubt whet the government's appetite for more of the same. And that's a frightening thought. Because the administration's rationale for making such demands isn't exactly rock solid. It argues that the information it has requested, which includes 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from a one-week period, is essential to its upcoming defense of the constitutionality of the Child Online Protection Act, a federal law designed to keep children from sexually explicit content on the Internet.... Only by analyzing such data, argues the DOJ, can the government learn how often random searches turn up pornography. But is it really statistically accurate to surmise minors' access to raunchy content by analyzing the aggregate behavior of adults who are exercising adult intentions and adult rights? Doesn't seem like it. And isn't the administration really demanding this information to further its own political agenda, trying to prop up legislation that has already been identified as faulty? Remember, in June of 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court found that COPA likely violates the First Amendment right to free speech. Writing for the majority, which sent the law back to a lower court for review, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote, "There is a potential for extraordinary harm and a serious chill upon protected speech [if the law were to take effect.]" There's a lot more at stake here than just our privacy, folks. Let's hope we come up with a way to get some salt on this icy slope. |
....If we as citizens start out with an understanding that these people up there—the President, the Congress, the Supreme Court, all those institutions pretending to be “checks and balances”—do not have our interests at heart, we are on a course towards the truth. Not to know that is to make us helpless before determined liars. The deeply ingrained belief—no, not from birth but from the educational system and from our culture in general—that the United States is an especially virtuous nation makes us especially vulnerable to government deception. It starts early, in the first grade, when we are compelled to “pledge allegiance” (before we even know what that means), forced to proclaim that we are a nation with “liberty and justice for all.” And then come the countless ceremonies, whether at the ballpark or elsewhere, where we are expected to stand and bow our heads during the singing of the “Star-Spangled Banner,” announcing that we are “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” There is also the unofficial national anthem “God Bless America,” and you are looked on with suspicion if you ask why we would expect God to single out this one nation—just 5 percent of the world’s population—for his or her blessing.If your starting point for evaluating the world around you is the firm belief that this nation is somehow endowed by Providence with unique qualities that make it morally superior to every other nation on Earth, then you are not likely to question the President when he says we are sending our troops here or there, or bombing this or that, in order to spread our values—democracy, liberty, and let’s not forget free enterprise—to some God-forsaken (literally) place in the world.It becomes necessary then, if we are going to protect ourselves and our fellow citizens against policies that will be disastrous not only for other people but for Americans too, that we face some facts that disturb the idea of a uniquely virtuous nation. These facts are embarrassing, but must be faced if we are to be honest. We must face our long history of ethnic cleansing, in which millions of Indians were driven off their land by means of massacres and forced evacuations. And our long history, still not behind us, of slavery, segregation, and racism. We must face our record of imperial conquest, in the Caribbean and in the Pacific, our shameful wars against small countries a tenth our size: Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq. And the lingering memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is not a history of which we can be proud..... |
"The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naive and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who likes his country more than the rest of us, and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair." - - - H.L. Mencken |
Can someone please explain to me the fuck another committee that will be ignored is "constitutional check on presidential power"? The notion that a Republican-controlled committee will exercise any "oversight" is laughable on its face. The administration violated federal law by failing to conduct full briefings to the required Committees about the program. The Republican solution? Let's set up another committee so we can get screwed again! Please, Mr. President, here's another chance to fuck us every which way you can! More subcommittees to ignore! More rules to break! Same rape, different position. Seriously, this Republican party is filled with legislative masochists who apparently get off getting abused time and time again by this administration. Every legal scholar out there that doesn't have his mouth firmly sucking on the teat of this administration has concluded this program is blatantly illegal. Not illegal like getting blown in the Oval Office, but illegal in the sense of actually having violated both statutes and the Constitution of the United States. This isn't some evil Sudoku puzzle, the legal issues aren't hard to solve. The law is clear--the President has committed a crime. He has committed it in the most abhorrent manner possible: by claiming to have the powers of a King. This proposal leaves that claim of absolute power completely unchallenged. Even if it passes, the President still maintains that he has the power to IGNORE the law. With Yoo holding the knife, the President has castrated Congress, and instead of screaming out in pain and justice, the Republicans play around in a pool of their own blood. Republicans just don't get it; President Bush's radical theory of Executive power is killing Congress. Every Senator that endorses this cover-up proposal thereby endorses the radical and undemocratic theory of the President as King. Do Senators Snowe and Hagel agree that the President can order the crushing of children's testicles? Do they agree that the President can order targeted assassinations on our own soil? Do they agree that the President can round up dissenters and lock them up if he thinks they're a threat to his precious War On Terror? Apparently so, because that is what President Bush's argument is all about: absolute, infallible Executive power. America, behold. Feast your eyes on a Republican party filled with moral simpletons incapable of recognizing the depravity of this administration; it is a party filled partisan hacks too gutless to do anything but stand by with blank stares as the flickering flame of accountability dims in the shadow of this President, this King. |
"Any important Republican who comes out and says they didn't know me is almost certainly lying."- - - Jack Abramoff |
"It is far better to fight and die for just causes, even against impossible odds, than to live in the perceived safety of indifference and complacency that characterizes our time. Our dance of life on this earth is short. We seriously delude ourselves if we think there is safety in capitulation to unjust authority. Our spirits thirst for justice. The organizing principle of life itself is not competition—survival of the fittest; it is mutual cooperation, looking out for the welfare of others. This is what makes life worth living. The public interest is a far nobler cause than private wealth and industrial slavery." - - - Charles Sullivan |
|
Dear Friend: Thank you for writing to express your opposition to the high costs of health care and the Bush Administration's proposal to expand Health Savings Accounts. I appreciate hearing from you, and I agree with you. The Bush Administration claims that Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are "consumer-driven health plans" that allow people to individually set aside money to pay for un-reimbursed medical expenses. In fact, HSAs are tax breaks that primarily benefit upper-income individuals who can afford to put money away and receive the maximum tax advantage. HSAs provide little or no benefit for middle- and low-income people, who are in a lower tax bracket and less likely to have extra money to set aside. In addition to providing tax breaks for upper-income people, HSAs are designed to induce consumers to enroll in health plans with a deductible of at least $1,000 for individuals and $2,000 for family coverage. People who enroll in these high-deductible plans usually wind up spending more on health care, and they are more likely to delay or forgo treatment than people in comprehensive health plans. As over 46 million Americans fall into the ranks of the uninsured and health care costs and insurance premiums continue to soar, President Bush wants to increase the amount of money individuals can deposit into HSAs. This is an inequitable and unacceptable way of addressing America 's health care crisis that fails working families, children, seniors, people with disabilities, and the poor. Again, thank you for writing to me. Rest assured, I will fight the President's proposed expansion of Health Savings Accounts and will work hard to lower the costs of medical care, and to make health coverage available to all Americans. Barbara Boxer United States Senator |
This morning I attended the Cerritos Optimist Club's annual Oratorical Contest at the Sheraton. In addition to a delicious meal with parents, teachers and fellow Optimists, I heard the excellent inspirational speeches of seven students from the A.B.C. School District. As I listened, I noticed that all seven students had dark black hair. I reflected that all were either immigrants or the children of immigrants and that the future of our country will be enriched with their contributions and talents. To me, the Oratorical Contest was a teaching moment for all the adults present. It was an opportunity to reflect on the immigration debate now raging in the United States. I do not know if each of these students or their parents are documented or undocumented. However, this was on my mind as the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee takes up a series of proposed immigration reforms. At the present time there exists an hysterical anti-immigration Sentiment sweeping even Cerritos as evidenced by the Cerritos Republican Club inviting Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman Project, to address their club. Recently, Cardinal Roger Mahony spoke out against this hysteria. He framed the immigration debate in moral and ethical terms. He suggested that the Judeo-Christian Tradition welcomed the immigrant. Yes, some reforms are needed. As we say in our Optimist Creed ... to spend so much time on our own self improvement that we have no time to be critical of others... The Minutemen type would have it to be a felon to help an undocumented immigrant. The priest, rabbi, iman, minister, etc would have to have everyone show their papers before entering a House of Worship. What are we coming to as a country? What can we do about the mean Spirited hysteria? As we are all immigrants or children of immigrants (except for native Americans) why can't we find ways to deal with our problems without being mean-spirited? What are some considerations for reforming immigration. Here are some Ideas being considered: 1) visas for family members of migrants to reduce what can be decades-long waits to reunify 2) a guest worker program with a path to permanent residency 3) legalization of undocumented migrants 4) better legal process to guarantee immigrants rights, and 5) economic development in poor countries to reduce the need to migrate. Yes, let's debate the issue of immigration but let us do it with a sense of justice, fairness and concern for all our fellow human beings on planet earth. Charlie Ara, Cerritos resident. |
"The large majority of the population already agrees with the things activists are committed to. All we have to do is organize people who are convinced." - - - Noam Chomsky |
"There was no real investigation conducted during the 30-day period. I can't emphasize this enough." - - - Rep. Peter King of New York, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, explaining to CNN about how officials from the Homeland Security and Treasury departments told him weeks ago that their 30-day review of the deal did not look into the question of links between DP World and al Qaeda, after he asked about investigation into possible terrorist ties. |
"[Y]our national greatness, swelling vanity; your denunciation of tyrants, brass-fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are, to Him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy -- a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages." - - - Frederick Douglass |
"America continues to pretend that we are building something of value in Iraq. And yet, common sense dictates that when one seeks to build on a corrupt foundation, whatever it is that is being constructed is doomed eventually to collapse. Our nation's involvement in Iraq is based on as corrupt a foundation as imaginable. We didn't go to war for sound national-security reasons (i.e., a threat that manifested itself in a form solvable only through military intervention), but rather for domestic political reasons based on ideology that exploited the fear and ignorance of the American people in the post-Sept. 11, 2001, world. |
A Democratic committee said it has gathered evidence showing that as many as 600 newly registered Republicans - part of an increase touted by the party in recent months - may be fraudulent. Republican Party officials acknowledge there are some registration problems but say the scope is much smaller than Democrats claim. So far, the Democratic Voter Education and Registration Fund has given the Orange County Registrar of Voters Office 37 signed complaints in which Orange County voters said they were switched to Republican registration without their consent. According to the committee, 40 other voters requested that complaint forms be sent to them with forms to re-register as Democrats. An additional 200 did not want to fill out complaint forms, but asked the committee to help them switch back to the Democratic Party. The committee also found more than 300 forms listing invalid addresses and phone numbers. "People came to us complaining about this," said Paul Hefner, the Democratic committee spokesman. "They were getting cards in the mail that said, 'Welcome to the Republican Party.' They said they had been tricked and they were angry." The committee provided The Orange County Register with copies of the complaint forms and other documentation of their investigation. They are trying to determine which agency would be most appropriate to conduct a criminal investigation.... |
Well the weight of the world is FALLING And on my back I've been CRAWLING The state of affairs is APPALLING And the 6 o'clock news keeps CALLING Well I've been trying to see the world through their eyes Where black is white and day is night Left is Right Left is Right Left is Right, For me Well negotiations keep STALLING The United Nations keeps CALLING The Skeletons you're HAULING Won't hold when you're FALLING Put your head in the sand and you'll never know What's waiting for you in the depths below (below) Don't believe everything that you read Take what you want and keep what you need TWISTED NIXON |
|
|
|
|
|
The Progressive Blog Alliance
Leave a comment here to join.
|