Yes, Chele, your comparison is kind of like how 50 million of us who voted for the other guys have had to put up with Bush for 8 years...that's democracy for you. Maybe you are the one who needs to wise up.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database It is the name given to me by my grand
children, that is the sweetest name in the world to me, it is music to my ears from them. Wish you could understand that.
Yes, it is Grand!
The whole event is just awesome. Two million people, positive, upbeat, ready to step up and accept the challenge of this dynamic new president to use whatever gifts and talents we have to work with our fellow citizens to help make this a better world. I give praise that this day has come.
The woman was Eleanor Roosevelt. To say she was nothing to look at was an understatement. Very homely looking but what she accomplished which made me think of her when others are talking about looks. Do looks matter- what about a person's soul and heart- does that not count for anything now?
My stepmom worked in Washington during WWII. She saw Eleanor Roosevelt several times. She told me about how Mrs. Roosevelt would board a pubic bus and say hello to the people sitting there, not pretentious at all. I remember her later when she was working at the United Nations as a delegate. She became one of the greatest women of the 20th Century. She was an humanitarian and civic leader (among other roles). She worked for the welfare of youth, black Americans, the poor, and women, at home and abroad. She persuaded her husband to create NYA which gave financial aid to students and young people. She worked closely with the NAACP. She visited the troops overseas during WWII.She was a leader in human right efforts. What she may have lacked in looks she certainly made up for it in her good deeds.
I think October is going to be a very interesting month.
Grand Jury Declines to Indict McKinney...sm
Grand Jury Declines to Indict McKinney
Grand jury declines to indict Cynthia McKinney in connection with Capitol Police confrontation
(AP) A grand jury declined Friday to indict Rep. Cynthia McKinney in connection with a confrontation in which she admitted hitting a police officer who tried to stop her from entering a House office building.
The grand jury had been considering the case since shortly after the March 29 incident, which has led to much discussion on Capitol Hill about race and the conduct of lawmakers and the officers who protect them.
We respect the decision of the grand jury in this difficult matter, said U.S. Attorney Kenneth Wainstein.
His statement, released late Friday, also included support for the officer involved, Paul McKenna, and the Capitol Police. He said, This is a tremendously difficult job, and it is one that Officer McKenna and his colleagues perform with the utmost professionalism and dignity.
With that, Wainstein closed a case that has simmered with racial and political tension.
I am relieved that this unfortunate incident is behind me, McKinney said in a statement Friday night. I accept today's grand jury finding of 'no probable cause' as right and just and the proper resolution of this case.
The encounter began when McKinney, D-Ga., tried to enter a House office building without walking through a metal detector or wearing the lapel pin that identifies members of Congress.
McKenna did not recognize her as a member of Congress and asked her three times to stop. When she ignored him, he tried to stop her. McKinney then hit him.
McKinney described the encounter as racial profiling, insisting she had been assaulted and had done nothing wrong.
McKinney is black. McKenna is white.
She received little public support for that stance, even within the Congressional Black Caucus.
Wainstein, meanwhile, sought an indictment from a federal grand jury, with assault on a police officer mentioned in the filings as a possible charge. That is a felony that would require an indictment.
The grand jury then subpoenaed several House aides thought to have witnessed the encounter. McKenna, too, testified. The grand jury voted not to indict her. Prosecutors also could have charged McKinney with simple assault without having to seek an indictment.
Members of the black caucus privately urged McKinney to put the matter behind her. The next morning, she appeared on the House floor to apologize.
I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all, and I regret its escalation, and I apologize, McKinney, D-Ga., said April 6. There should not have been any physical contact in this incident.
IF it is democracy they truly want.
Here's a prediction of what may happen in Cuba. Note how Cubans feel regarding healthcare and education in Cuba, something Americans are in no immediate danger of experiencing from our so-called free government.
so what is democracy to you...
you are in favor of letting money then run this country, to do freely anything it wants - not sure I get that at all in fact that sounds more like socialism to me - this attitude sent down from the rich that we should just be 'lucky to have jobs' and how only the poor and middleclass should suffer, you know, for the benefit of the country - we are the only ones sacrificing.
Not getting that at all...
What is in it for me, what have the rich corporations done for me, please tell me, how am I better off now.
I could sit here all day typing the problems I have right now financially, so please share how great things are now that only the poor and middle class are carrying the burdens for roadwork, childcare (you know, schools feeding kids breakfast, lunch, and even dinner most places because we dump our kids there and leave them), I could just go on and on and on...
This is the history of democracy:
Athens
450 - 500 BCE
"It is called a government of the people (demokratia) becaue we live in considertion of not the few, but of the majority." - Thucydides on Pericles' view of democracy
Evolution of Democracy
Democracy in Greece was first introduced in Athens in the 505 BCE by Cleisthenes. Previous to democracy Greek city-states were ruled by a an elite few, rich, powerful men, known as tyrants. This Oligarchy limited the power to very few people. Democracy was a government structured to serve the people. All white, male citizens had the right to vote under a democratic democracy. Unlike present democracy, citizens would convine and openly discuss and vote for elections. This type of democracy is called direct democracy. As a society it benefited the majority, which were the middle and lower classes. The middle and lower classes received a voice , giving them power. The upper class, aristrocrats, lost power through a democratic government. They no longer received more power because of thier social standing.
I try not to be nasty on this board, but I just can't believe how many people are wanting the demise of democracy and, with open arms, are accepting everything the democrats state as truth. The demise of the 2-party system will only lead to socialism or something worse. Are you ready for that?
After the town meeting in MO yesterday, I honestly believe O has blinders on. He still doesn't know why the tea parties were held. He is relying on someone to give him an accounting of why and he is going along with that. He doesn't realize that was not what the protest was about. Maybe he should have gone to one of the parties to see the truth. But no, he'll rely on others for the not-so-much-truth.
Same with the economy. How much has changed? Not much. Yet he thinks it's getting better. Well, I don't see it happening. Unemployment higher, Chrysler claiming bankruptcy, GM soon to follow. Banks still not lending. CEOs still taking their bonuses; i.e., business and politics as usual.
Sure, it's only 100 days, but for the debt we now have to shoulder, how does it get paid back when the government refuses to take payment from the banks that wanted to pay off their debt? This government WANTS to control and own all business and banking institutions, no ifs, ands, or buts.
Yesterday, DH applied for SS since he doesn't believe it will be there in a few years, so for the 40-some years he worked and paid into the system, he wants to get something back and, anyway, there is no work for him. So far this year, he worked 15 days. Son still can't find a job after a year. Yeah, there are jobs out there. NOT!
This is my honest opinion.
Federal Grand Jury Digging Deep into Bush Crimes
PRESIDENT INDICTEDFEDERAL GRAND JURY DIGGING DEEP INTO BUSH CRIMES
By Greg SzymanskiA federal whistleblower close to the Chicago federal grand jury probe into perjury and obstruction charges against President Bush and others said indictments of top officials were handed down this week. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Northern District of Illinois, however, refused to confirm or deny the source’s account.
“We are not talking about any aspect of this case, and our office is not commenting on anything regarding the investigation at this time,” said Randall Sanborn from the office of U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, the attorney conducting the grand jury probe into whether Bush and others in his administration violated federal law in a number of sensitive areas, including leaking the name of a CIA operative to the media.
In December 2003, Fitzgerald was named special counsel to investigate the alleged disclosure of Valerie Plame’s name to several mainstream columnists, but the present grand jury probe has expanded to include widereaching allegations of criminal activity as new information has surfaced.
Although the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago is staying silent, it is well known that Fitzgerald is digging deep into an assortment of serious improprieties among many Bush administration figures, based, in part, on subpoenaed testimony provided by former Secretary of State Colin Powell.
According to whistleblower Tom Heneghen, who recently reported on truthradio.com, Powell testified before the citizen grand jury that Bush had taken the United States to war based on lies, which is a capital crime involving treason under the U.S. Code. “Regarding the Powell testimony, there is no comment,” said Sanborn.
However, sources close to the federal grade jury probe also allegedly told Heneghen a host of administration figures under Bush were indicted, including Vice President Richard Cheney, Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Cheney advisor Mary Matalin. Heneghen, unavailable for comment, also allegedly told sources White House advisor Karl Rove was indicted for perjury in a major document shredding operation cover-up.
In recent weeks, there has been much controversy over Fitzgerald’s wide-reaching probe, which is extending far beyond the Bush administration to include what some have called “a wholesale cleansing” of a crimeladen White House and Congress.
Fitzgerald’s investigation is said to be also centered on members of the 9-11 Commission, members on both sides of the aisle in the House and Senate and also select high-powered members of the media.
Needless to say, administration officials are “fighting mad” with Fitzgerald. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts is trying to derail Fitzgerald’s probe by calling him to testify before the Senate regarding his true motives behind the investigation.
Political observers are now wondering whether administration-friendly Republican legislators, some under investigation themselves, are conspiring like President Nixon did in Watergate with Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in an attempt to shield the Bush administration from prosecution.
In late July, reports about the recent bomb scare in the subway under the congressional offices at the Dirksen Building—coincidently near where Fitzgerald was holding his grand jury hearings—raised questions as to whether government operatives were sending the zealous prosecutor a “warning message” that he was entering dangerous waters with his investigation.
The bomb scare was reported to local police late Monday afternoon, July 18, causing the subway to be evacuated for approximately 45 minutes while bomb sniffing dogs and SWAT team members searched for what was reported to be “a suspicious package” left on one of the subway cars.
Fitzgerald began serving as the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois in September 2001. He was initially appointed on an interim basis by former Attorney General Ashcroft before being nominated by Bush.
The Senate confirmed his nomination by unanimous consent in October 2001. In December 2003, he was named special counsel to investigate the Plame case. Based on the testimony of ABC sources in late July, it appears that at least two close associates of Rove testified before the grand jury. One was Susan Ralston, a longtime associate of Rove and considered to be his right hand.
Bush was correct in saying Monday night that “Our nation is being tested in a way that we have not been since the start of the Cold War.” Unfortunately, it’s Bush’s administration that is testing us—with its relentless incompetence, attacks on our civil liberties and inability to acknowledge the bankruptcy of its policies.
If representative government were alive and well in America, President Bush would not have dared to give the speech he made Monday on the fifth anniversary of 9/11. In a blatantly partisan screed, the president ripped off a nation’s mourning for the 9/11 victims in order to justify his totally unrelated and disastrous invasion of Iraq.
The president’s shameless remarks on this solemn occasion were so rife with egregious distortions of fact and logic as to beg ridicule, let alone refutation by a free press, a sturdy political opposition party and an informed public. Sadly, those three essential pillars of a free society have been subverted by five years of willful presidential exploitation of our fears, mocking the Founding Fathers’ historic dream of a government accountable to the public.
The model for this administration is the opposite of Jeffersonian democracy, and instead increasingly invites comparison with the madness that destroyed Rome, Germany and the Soviet Union: Authoritarianism that thrives on stoking paralyzing fear of the barbarians at the gate. “We are in a war that will set the course for this new century and determine the destiny of millions across the world,” Bush said, justifying his Iraq quagmire while sidestepping the fact that Islamic extremism, as well as 15 of the 19 hijackers, was most clearly nurtured by Saudi Arabia, the bizarre oil theocracy with intimate ties to the Bush dynasty, but not former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
“Since the horror of 9/11, we’ve learned a great deal about the enemy,” continued the president. “We have learned that they form a global network of extremists who are driven by a perverted vision of Islam.” But if such a network exists, it now extends to Iraq only as a result of the U.S. invasion.
“We have learned that their goal is to build a radical Islamic empire where women are prisoners in their homes, men are beaten for missing prayer meetings and terrorists have a safe haven to plan and launch attacks on America and other civilized nations,” Bush said. Tragically, he is describing quite accurately the situation in most of post-invasion Iraq, where his great “shock-and-awe” attempt at nation-building has turned a stable secular dictatorship into a post-apocalyptic civil war, where only religious extremists and power-mad nihilists thrive.
In urging us to join him at the barricades of what he calls “the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century and the calling of our generation,” Bush cynically conflates Hussein with that deposed dictator’s sworn enemy, the religious fanatics of Al Qaeda, mere days after the Republican-run Senate Select Committee on Intelligence established yet again that the two were fundamentally at odds.
Hussein, the Senate committee announced Friday, “did not trust Al Qaeda or any other radical Islamist group and did not want to cooperate with them.”
In fact, Hussein was exactly the kind of regional strongman the United States supported, trained and propped up throughout the Cold War. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, then working for President Ronald Reagan, even infamously embraced Hussein in the ’80s because his Iraq was considered a bulwark against fundamentalist revolutionary Iran.
Now we have all but handed post-Hussein Iraq to Shiite fundamentalists trained by and allied with the Iran of the ayatollahs. On Monday, the prime minister of “liberated” Iraq, who spent years in exile under the tutelage of Iran’s ayatollahs, was back in Tehran concluding agreements on mutual security with the leader of that “rogue regime.” How bizarre that Bush’s invasion of Iraq, a country that did not have a functioning WMD program, has vastly increased the power of Iran, which, according to Bush, does. Sometimes, by accident, Bush gets it close to right. “Our nation is being tested in a way that we have not been since the start of the Cold War,” he said. Unfortunately, it is his administration that is testing us with its relentless incompetence, attacks on our civil liberties and inability to acknowledge the bankruptcy of its policies. The more his deadly failures have become evident, the shriller the rhetoric and the more his administration digs in its heels.
Peel back the lies and hyperbole from Bush’s speech and you are left with one pressing concern: If this “war on terror” is really so important to the worldwide battle for freedom, why have we allowed this democracy-mocking demagogue to lead us through it?
I don't think every American wants democracy. sm
In fact, I know they don't. There are more than a few Americans who think we deserved 9/11. Nancy Pelosi is one of them. Now look where she is.
My dear, you do know that the New Democracy is what - sm
The 'New Democracy' is what The Shining Path (Communist Party of Peru), New People's Army (Communisty Party of the Philippines), and the Maoists (Communist Party of India) are calling their cultural revolution, right?
You know, the revolution where they tried to impose a dictatorship of the proletariat through such 'democratic' things as terrorism against peasants and union workers and other 'dissidents' in their own countries?
And I'm sure you know that the goal of the 'New Democracy' is to induce a world-wide revolution as a path to what they call 'pure' communism?
You know all that, right?
Otherwise, your statement about dragging Americans 'kicking and screaming into the new democracy' would just sound uneducated and silly.
It is called Democracy.
Of course it is okay for the majority to elect whomever they want. Your post sounds like a case of Republican sour grapes to me.
It is the way of a democracy. I keep in touch with my senators and one...sm
lone representative. I pay attention to whether they vote in my best interest and are honest in their dealings and let them know if I disagree, and vote or not vote for them in the next election. You are naive if you think that democrats are solely responsible for this meltdown. Looking for the other party to blame is counterproductive and will help no one. Money hungry greed is what has led us to this and both parties are to blame.
HBO Special Hacking Democracy sm
Here is the link to the trailer for the HBO Special Hacking Democracy. There are also links up there to the whole thing (9 parts).
how in the world can we dictate what they do with their prisoners? You have to take a wider view of this bill. It is nothing like what you have presented here. It's a bill about democracy and a democratic nation.
Bush/Saakashvili alliance is not about democracy.
It's not rocket science. Even a 5-minute superficial read of the history of the pipeline and the below-the-radar placement of US troops in Georgia makes that abundantly clear.
Democracy Obama-style! Great post. Thanks.
.
For many reasons, the fact that Israel is a successful democracy
in the midst of tyrannical middle eastern governments. The fact that the U.S. supports Israel. The fact that Israel has turned their once arid country into a fertile landscape and have managed to become a wealthy nation despite it's geographical short-comings and to the dismay of their neighbors. Also because the palestinians have managed to paint themselves as the underdog in a battle that has long been a land dispute and not an "occupation." And I have even begun to touch on the religious and scriptural reasons for the hatred.
Beacon of democracy must walk the walk,
No more Bush bluster. If the war on terror means anthing to you, listen up. One giant step in restoring mangled image abroad (in preparation for global diplomacy aimed at a 21st century approach to the war on terror) would be to live by example. Credibility is the name of the game in that arena.
For those among us who would be the first to decry an Obama administration that would "change our country as we know it," it might be helpful to remember just how much of that country we lost during W's reign of terror...writ of habeas corpus, presumed innocence, right to counsel and fair trial, burden or proof, not to mention even a modicum of acknowledgement of basic human rights and condemnation of torture. Sound familiar?
marks the location of current message within thread
