Don't forget Larry "Don't Squeeze the Charmin" Craig...

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) � Idaho Sen. Larry Craig has lost his latest attempt to withdraw his guilty plea in a Minneapolis airport men's room sex sting.

A three-judge panel of the Minnesota Court of Appeals on Tuesday rejected the Republican's bid to toss out his disorderly conduct conviction.

Craig was arrested in June 2007 in a Minneapolis airport bathroom stall by an undercover officer who said the senator solicited sex.

He pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor and paid a fine, but changed his mind after word of his arrest became public. Craig insisted he was innocent, but the case effectively ended his political career.

Craig's attorney argued before the appeals court this September that there was insufficient evidence for any judge to find him guilty. Prosecutors said his guilty plea should stand.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iM7VsmCI91xXDASkhgtGf3_zk__gD94V9JQ00

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

They were talking about the idea of implementing a stimulus package for (in particular) the auto industry. Well, turns out that they have already been trying to pass a stimulus package and I'll give you one guess as to who's blocking that. In the meantime if the auto industry goes down that's another 2-3 million jobs. Nice going Bush!

on Glenn Beck a couple of days ago, use the links below to see part of the video or read the transcript. It concerned a tax revolt and whether or not anyone would be willing to stop paying taxes and go to jail. Besides being a very funny man, Nelson was inspiring when he said he never voted to be part owner of GM or for any of the other nonsense going on today. He does not want to stick his children, grandchildren and the great grandchild on the way with the tab for all of this irresponsible spending.

video: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/29/video-craig-t-nelson-s-gl_n_209024.html

A Criminal Administration
by Paul Craig Roberts

Caught in gratuitous and illegal spying on American citizens, the Bush administration has defended its illegal activity and set the Justice (sic) Department on the trail of the person or persons who informed the New York Times of Bush's violation of law. Note the astounding paradox: The Bush administration is caught red-handed in blatant illegality and responds by trying to arrest the patriot who exposed the administration's illegal behavior.

Bush has actually declared it treasonous to reveal his illegal behavior! His propagandists, who masquerade as news organizations, have taken up the line: To reveal wrong-doing by the Bush administration is to give aid and comfort to the enemy.

Compared to Spygate, Watergate was a kindergarten picnic. The Bush administration's lies, felonies, and illegalities have revealed it to be a criminal administration with a police state mentality and police state methods. Now Bush and his attorney general have gone the final step and declared Bush to be above the law. Bush aggressively mimics Hitler's claim that defense of the realm entitles him to ignore the rule of law.

Bush's acts of illegal domestic spying are gratuitous because there are no valid reasons for Bush to illegally spy. The Foreign Intelligence Services Act gives Bush all the power he needs to spy on terrorist suspects. All the administration is required to do is to apply to a secret FISA court for warrants. The Act permits the administration to spy first and then apply for a warrant, should time be of the essence.

The problem is that Bush has totally ignored the law and the court. Why would President Bush ignore the law and the FISA court? It is certainly not because the court in its three decades of existence was uncooperative. According to attorney Martin Garbus (New York Observer, 12/28/05), the secret court has issued more warrants than all federal district judges combined, only once denying a warrant.

Why, then, has the administration created another scandal for itself on top of the WMD, torture, hurricane, and illegal detention scandals?

There are two possible reasons.

One reason is that the Bush administration is being used to concentrate power in the executive. The old conservative movement, which honors the separation of powers, has been swept away. Its place has been taken by a neoconservative movement that worships executive power.

The other reason is that the Bush administration could not go to the FISA secret court for warrants because it was not spying for legitimate reasons and, therefore, had to keep the court in the dark about its activities.

What might these illegitimate reasons be? Could it be that the Bush administration used the spy apparatus of the US government in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election?

Could we attribute the feebleness of the Democrats as an opposition party to information obtained through illegal spying that would subject them to blackmail?

These possible reasons for bypassing the law and the court need to be fully investigated and debated. No administration in my lifetime has given so many strong reasons to oppose and condemn it as has the Bush administration. Nixon was driven from office because of a minor burglary of no consequence in itself. Clinton was impeached because he did not want the embarrassment of publicly acknowledging that he engaged in adulterous sex acts in the Oval Office. In contrast, Bush has deceived the public and Congress in order to invade Iraq, illegally detained Americans, illegally tortured detainees, and illegally spied on Americans. Bush has upheld neither the Constitution nor the law of the land. A majority of Americans disapprove of what Bush has done; yet, the Democratic Party remains a muted spectator.

Why is the Justice (sic) Department investigating the leak of Bush's illegal activity instead of the illegal activity committed by Bush? Is the purpose to stonewall Congress' investigation of Bush's illegal spying? By announcing a Justice (sic) Department investigation, the Bush administration positions itself to decline to respond to Congress on the grounds that it would compromise its own investigation into national security matters.

What will the federal courts do? When Hitler challenged the German judicial system, it collapsed and accepted that Hitler was the law. Hitler's claims were based on nothing but his claims, just as the claim for extra-legal power for Bush is based on nothing but memos written by his political appointees.

The Bush administration, backed by the neoconservative Federalist Society, has brought the separation of powers, the foundation of our political system, to crisis. The Federalist Society, an organization of Republican lawyers, favors more energy in the executive. Distrustful of Congress and the American people, the Federalist Society never fails to support rulings that concentrate power in the executive branch of government. It is a paradox that conservative foundations and individuals have poured money for 23 years into an organization that is inimical to the separation of powers, the foundation of our constitutional system.

September 11, 2001, played into neoconservative hands exactly as the 1933 Reichstag fire played into Hitler's hands. Fear, hysteria, and national emergency are proven tools of political power grabs. Now that the federal courts are beginning to show some resistance to Bush's claims of power, will another terrorist attack allow the Bush administration to complete its coup?

_____

Dr. Roberts is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.

Copyright � 2006 Creators Syndicate

He conned me, just like he conned those in Congress who voted for the war against Iraq. I believed him when he said Iraq was involved with 9/11, and I wholeheartedly supported his war against Iraq for the reasons he gave.

But he didn't lie about his personal sex life, so his lies don't count to some people.

Also don't forget that Bush's reckless failure to nail 150 Taliban members is really Clinton's fault.

his famous "signing statements," like when he signed the law against torture and then quietly came back later and basically added that he doesn't have to obey that law if he doesn't want to.

I also find it astonishing that some people really believe that Democrats run Congress. The House may have a Democratic majority, but the Republicans still have the majority in the Senate. The Senate needs 60 Democrats in order to avoid a Republican fillibuster, and to my knowledge, they still don't have that number, even though they picked up a few seats in this year's election, so the Republicans can still continue to control the "do-nothing Congress."

(I hope this post makes sense. Not feeling well and need to take meds and go to bed.

)

Or whatever name the woman was dubbed for going on TV and shouting that after he's in office her..."mortgage will be paid...gas in her car...bills paid...yada, yada, yada"...how soon we forget about that huh?

I am saddened that most people cannot see past the fact that Obama is a black man, period. To some, that's all the qualification he needs. He may very well be the perfect man for the job, be he black or white, or whatever, but I'm afraid he'll never be given the chance to prove that because so many are just fixated on the fact that he's black...so sad.

I do have to add that I did not vote for Obama, not because he's black, but because I disagree with his views. Even my 10 YO son said today that it doesn't matter what color his skin is, it matters what kind of a man he is, and he is so right. Obama is much more than that, but most just can't see past his ethnicity and that's so sad and surely not what he (or MLK) would have wanted.

lobbyists in which Obama stated that there would be no place for lobbyists in Washington. Then he later said lobbyists were okay but set up certain guidelines in regards to appointing them. Then when that kept him from appointing certain lobbyists.....he totally disregarded the guidelines that he himself stated.

Oh....and he didn't bow to the Saudi King......yeah right. That's like Bill Clinton saying he didn't have sex with THAT woman. LMAO!

Please....if anyone else can think of lies that I have missed....feel free to add.

James Carville who said he wanted Bush to fail. Funny how the liberal media didn't jump on that comment though. Once again....goes to show how one-sided the media is.

As someone who didn't vote for Barrack Obama, I want him to fail because I believe the road he wants to take us down is not the right road. I don't want him hurt or anything, but I don't want him to do everything he wants to do either because I think it will be bad for our country.

There is nothing wrong with saying that either. If James Carville didn't agree with what Bush was doing, he had every right to say he wished him to fail. The same goes for anyone who doesn't believe in what Obama is doing. We have a right to wish him to fail for the sake of our country. Just because a president fails in completing his own personal agenda does not mean that America fails as well and that is what you all fail to see. All you see is I said I want him to fail and therefore I want America to fail....which is so not the case.

It amazes me that one side hates Bush and gives the man no credit for anything he does and does nothing but call him names and say how dumb he is. Now that Obama is in office, you can't see anything he does wrong or refuse to see the lies that he blatantly tells and you give him credit for everything.

I am still waiting for the day when people hold all politicians accountable for their actions instead of blindly following someone based on their political party alone.

Will Obama make mistakes....yes...he is only human. But that doesn't mean he should get a free pass for everything wrong he does either. Every politican should be held accountable for the mistakes they make. If Obama makes a mistakes...fine.....but my biggest problem with him is the fact that he blatantly lies about things. Compare his campaign rhetoric to what he is actually doing.

Honestly, if I had voted for Obama and believed what he said during his campaign, I'd be thoroughly ticked off at him. However, there are so many people who continue to believe the rhetoric and refuse to see with their own eyes what he is doing....it is just shameful really.

I received an intrusion alarm when I booted mine up this morning. Don't know if a hacker is after some personal information or if it's my friendly government stalking me because I disagree with Bush's policies.

Almost a year ago Bush reserved the right to declare martial law if/when the bird flu comes to the USA.

As for your other points, I'm sure there are home-grown terrorists in the USA. Will Bush limit his target to those people? That's the problem. Nobody knows for sure. All people can be certain of is how he feels about swiftboating and getting revenge on anyone who disagrees with him. And that's why this man should be forced to follow the law and use warrants when spying on Americans. He simply can't be trusted.

I do question which troops he will be using, though. They're too busy fighting Bush's war in Iraq (not to mention likely war in Iran) to be able to fight Bush's war against Americans who don't agree with him.

Don't forget Larry "Don't Squeeze the Charmin" Craig...

Sen. Craig loses appeal in airport sex sting case