Patriotism in the U.S

Truth Seeking

Dennis Kucinich Blog and News
Kucinich Watch
The Progressive Choice

"What's on your mind?"
{Time stamp is PermaLink}
Impeach Bush Now

Why we need to talk to and educate everyone we know.

Syndicate Subscribe with Bloglines Estimated Prophet

Keep up with the looming spectre of Electronic Vote Fraud. Black Box Voting

translate this page

** Progressive Tools**
...News Sites to Blogs...

Daily Web (print) News Sources: Daily audio news: weekly news shows:

Daily Blog Reads:
aortal: The Anti-Portal

Rate Me on Eatonweb Portal
bad enh so so good excellent

Rate Me on!
the worst pretty bad okay pretty good the best help?
Listed on BlogShares
Vote for my site on Blizg!

<< current


Technorati Profile
Weblog Commenting and Trackback by

Fascism should more
properly be called corporatism since it is
the merger of
state and corporate power

-Benito Mussolini

Estimated Prophet
"Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government."
-Thomas Jefferson

"One reason the U.N. was founded after the second world war was to confront aggressive dictators, actively and early, before they can attack the innocent and destroy the peace."

O.K, I'm not saying Saddam Hussein is innocent. But I am saying that my country, under the leadership of Mr Bush and his administration have subverted the one global democratic world body, the UN.

Here is a relevent quote from the UN Charter:
All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations." -- UN Charter (Chapter I, Article 2)

Inspector Hans Blix wishes he had more time to be effective.

Israel and Turkey top the list of nations violating United Nations Security Council Resolutions as you can read in this list compiled by Stephen Zunes.

In the print version of The American Prospect, I read an article entitled "The Republican Railroad" which touched on the phenomenon of the Republican majority in the House stopping Democrats from offering amendments on the floor; quoting Barney Frank "The House of Representitives is not in anyway a deliberative body anymore." This tactic, it has to be said, had been used by the Democrats themselves; but not to the extent of such instances as only eight of seventy- seven amendments offered by Democrats reaching debate while condsidering the No Child Left Behind Act in the House. Only five of 106 ammendments posted by Democrats were heard concerning the Securing Americas Future Act. Another illustration of the crippling of the democratic process is illustrated by Committee on the Judiciary Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) willfully ignoring a decades old rule that saw a requirement of at least one member of the minority having to vote with the majority before debate on judicial nominations can be cut off in commitee. Hatch has ignored this rule which was honored by Democrats when they were the majority, allowing the Republican minority to block nominees. I wish the article was available on line...

Then we have Justice Scalia of the Supreme Court. He would not allow independent media to cover a free speech award he recieved in Cleveland. Here is a quote from the linked article about that event about another area of concern: "In response to a student's question, Scalia said it was "a wonderful feeling" to have led the Supreme Court's rejection of a recount of the Florida vote, thus handing the election to Bush. Mr Scalia has some rather non-democratic views, read the entire reference by Seeing the Forest to this article by Scalia:
He believes God chooses humanity's leaders, and democracy obstructs God's wishes by imposing ordinary people as the decision-makers. He condemns the "tendency of democracy to obscure the divine authority behind government".

If one believes this, then one has the problem of how to identify the leaders that God chooses. Scalia appears to think that the way to identify legitimate God-chosen leaders is when they seize power in conflict, demonstrating that God chose them over others. He writes,
"These passages from Romans represent the consensus of Western thought until very recent times. Not just of Christian or religious thought, but of secular thought regarding the powers of the state. That consensus has been upset, I think, by the emergence of democracy. It is easy to see the hand of the Almighty behind rulers whose forebears, in the dim mists of history, were supposedly anointed by God, or who at least obtained their thrones in awful and unpredictable battles whose outcome was determined by the Lord of Hosts, that is, the Lord of Armies. It is much more difficult to see the hand of God—or any higher moral authority—behind the fools and rogues (as the losers would have it) whom we ourselves elect to do our own will. How can their power to avenge—to vindicate the “public order”—be any greater than our own?"

THIS is the thinking of the guy who, in an electoral conflict, put Bush into the White House, blocking the democratic recount because a vote count showing Gore winning would harm Bush's legitimate position as president-elect. Does Scalia see the Bush v Gore case as a "battle" that demonstrated that god chose Bush over Gore? Did Scalia think that he was acting as the people's - the Constitution's - agent in this, or instead as God's agent?

Now read this article.:"The government has room to scale back individual rights during wartime without violating the Constitution, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said Tuesday."

Scalia is a member of Opus Dei, as was FBI traitor Robert Hansen. You might be interested to read this piece by Joe Conason about Hansens possible right wing connections...

In reference to the quote at the top of the page; we are being led into an illegal war, by a President that has mislead us repeatedly about this life and death issue. The Legislative branch of our government adheres to Mr Bush's policies and any real debate seems squelched. The judicial branch also shares Mr Bush's policies and in fact appointed him president while voting among themselves down idealogical lines.

Mr Bush might not be a dictator but he sure is putting countless innocent lives in danger due to his failed diplomacy and what looms larger: a seeming will to rush to war.

I'll defer to the eloquence of Senator Robert Byrd, read his speech "Today I weep for my country."
When our troops are put in the line of danger, when millions of innocent civilians are in the line of fire because fate has them living in Baghdad, when this attack may throw our whole world out of political balance; is this the sort of behavior you expect out of your leader, a leader who was AWOL from his relatively cushy hitch in the Air National Guard, at one time patrolling the skies of Texas while less fortunate people went to war in Viet Nam.

" Minutes before the speech, an internal television monitor showed the president pumping his fist. "Feels good," he said. "

Commissioner of Baseball, maybe, Leader of the Free World- I don't think so.

Oh yes, in explanation for yesterday's "martial law" references; I had read this article equating a "code red" terrorist alert with an imposition of martial law.



Powered by Blogger Pro™