Kasich on O'Reilly warns Muslim-Americans that this is a Christian and Jewish nation

I was channel surfing and came upon former Republican congressman John Kasich sitting in for O'Reilly and he tells his guest, and I paraphrase only slightly, "build your mosques, but just remember that this is a Christian and Jewish nation."

John, I think you missed a word: Aryan.

Is it just me, or was that pretty much racist or at least anti-Semitic (in the anti-Muslim sense) for Kasich to say? "Just remember?" Just remember what? Just remember you don't belong in the big house with massah Kasich? And what are you going to do to those Muslim-Americans, Mr. Kasich, if they don't remember "their place" in "our" country?

And another thing, since when are we a Christian and Jewish nation? Iran is an Islamic nation. America was not formed as a Christian nation. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that we are Christian, that our leaders have to be Christian, that our laws have to be exclusively based on the Bible.

Second of all, if it's based on raw numbers and history, is America a Jewish nation at all? Christian, maybe, in terms of numbers, but Jewish? I think folks who throw the Jewish thing in are only doing it to cover their ass because they know they can attack Muslim-Americans with impunity but if they take on the Jews they'll look bad, even though they probably have no higher esteem for Jews than they do Muslims.

I know it shouldn't surprise me anymore, and perhaps it's more increasing worry than surprise, but I'm just astounded by the increasingly rabid, racist, intolerant, and extremist talk coming out of Republican leaders in the media and politics lately. From Ann Coulter to John Kasich in the media realm, to George Bush and the Republican congress in the political realm, these people seem to really hate everything that I was once taught to be proud of in America.

They want to ethnically, politically and religiously cleanse our country, and the only thing stopping them is that WWII wasn't long enough ago for them to get away with it. Read the rest of this post...

To my friends in the media, here is the ONLY QUESTION you need to force Bush to answer regarding domestic spying

From USA Today:

Despite the secrecy of the ongoing domestic surveillance, the White House had Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Gen. Michael Hayden, the nation's No. 2 intelligence official, brief reporters:....

He and Gonzales said it was essential to bypass the legal requirements to obtain secret court warrants for such operations because they had to move quickly to stop terrorist threats.

But they struggled to explain why the administration could not have relied on FISA provisions that allow surveillance to be conducted and a warrant obtained after the fact in emergencies.

(Yes, General Hayden, you remember him? The guy who said they didn't get the retroactive warrants because it involved "paperwork" and "making arguments.")

The Bush administration simply cannot answer this one question - if time was of the essence, why didn't they conduct the searches and get the warrants after the fact, something that is allowed under the FISA law? They conducted the searches alright, but they never once sought the retroactive warrants.

They have yet to answer this question, and this is the ONLY QUESTION you need to be immediately focusing on. There is no answer, short of the administration simply wanting to defy the law. It wasn't for expediency, because they could do the search immediately. And if they say it was because they were afraid the court would deny the warrant, that's absurd since the court has refused only 5 to 15 of 19,000 warrants that have been requested.

The only reason the court would refuse a warrant in post-9/11 America is if the warrant were for something outrageous, such as, oh I don't know, spying on an American elected official or an American journalist. It would have to be a pretty outrageous request if the administration were afraid the Potemkin court would turn it down. So aren't you the least bit curious what that request was, and whether it involved YOU?

Come on guys, make us proud, ask an obvious question and stick with it until you get a satisfactory answer. You have your Watergate staring you in the eyes, grab it. Read the rest of this post...

Is Bush illegally spying on American journalists? Part II

Remember when I asked this question a few days ago? Well, the question is percolating out there and just came up on Hardball. More from Hughes for America. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

It's beginning to look a lot like Cuba... Read the rest of this post...

So can Bush assassinate New York Times reporters?

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?

Check out the latest from the Bush administration:

Moschella relied on a Sept. 18, 2001, congressional resolution, known as the Authorization to Use Military Force, as primary legal justification for Bush's creation of a domestic spying program. He said Bush's powers as commander-in-chief give the president "the responsibility to protect the nation."

The resolution "clearly contemplates action within the United States," Moschella wrote, and acknowledges Bush's power to prevent terrorism against the United States.

The resolution says nothing about wiretaps, read it:

That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

Not a word about spying on Americans. Bush inferred it, so why not infer murder?

Clearly the Bush administration feels that the resolution permits Bush to do ANYTHING so long as he says he's doing it to further the war on terror.

So I ask again, can Bush have New York Times reporters assassinated? And if not, why not? If Scott McClellan says "of course not," then ask him to give us the legal explanation of what in the law is tying the president's hands. I'll bet he can't come up with anything, because this is the power the administration is claiming. The power of a dictator. Read the rest of this post...

Patriot Act may only be extended a month, so debate on it doesn't intrude on Congress' vacation

Republican nutjob Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., chairman of the
House Judiciary Committee, objected to the Senate-passed six-month reauthorization of the Patriot Act today - Sensenbrenner wants it reauthorized permanently. So he forced the House today to only pass a five-week extension of the Act.

The weird thing is that Sensenbrenner just totally stuck it to Bush. Bush wanted the bill reauthorized for good, opponents of the bill wanted it reauthorized for three months in order to give the Congress time to examine the reauthorization more closely, especially in light of Bush's illegal domestic spying which was only revealed on the day the Senate was voting on the legislation. So, 3 months would have been a loss for Bush, 6 months gave him something he could save face with - that means one month is a major slap at Bush.

But more importantly, it's clear Sensenbrenner thinks revisiting the bill in 5 weeks will help the bill's supporters get permanent (or long-term) reauthorization. Probably because that means the vote would be shortly after the State of the Union, a speech that usually gives any president a bump in the polls.

But is Sensenbrenner right? Within the next 5 weeks the domestic spying scandal is only going to grow. And sometime in the next 5 weeks we can perhaps expect Karl Rove to be indicted. In any case, Sensebrenner didn't help his cause any by going on TV this afternoon and saying that the debate over the legislation has already intruded on his Christmas vacation and a six month extension will intrude on his Fourth of July vacation, so that's why he's objecting.

As far as I'm concerned, 5 weeks is ample time to blow the domestic spying issue out of the water, and influence the Patriot Act and more. Sensenbrenner doesn't realize that a lot of conservatives are just as concerned as liberals about the growing threat unchecked government power is posing to America's freedoms. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Have you hugged your Senator McCarthy today? Read the rest of this post...

Conservatives unhappy with Bush illegally spying on Americans

From the Wall Street Journal

"It seems to me that if you're the president, you have to proceed with great caution when you do anything that flies in the face of the Constitution," said Warren Rudman, a former Republican senator from New Hampshire who has served on a number of government intelligence advisory boards. He calls the administration's surveillance program "a matter of grave concern."...

President Bush and his top aides argued this week that they were on solid legal ground in ordering -- without going through the secret court -- large-scale eavesdropping of communications between the U.S. and other countries to thwart potential terrorist attacks. They claim they had the authority to conduct the spying under the president's powers as commander in chief, as well as under a congressional resolution that approved the use of force in Afghanistan in 2001.

Yet some prominent conservatives reject that argument. Some even have accused the administration of treading on the Constitution and stretching the prerogatives of the presidency to the detriment of balanced government.

David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, described the spy program as a case of "presidential overreaching" that he said most Americans would reject. Columnist George Will wrote in a Washington Post opinion piece that "conservatives' wholesome wariness of presidential power has been a casualty of conservative presidents winning seven of the past 10 elections."

Bob Barr, a Georgia conservative who was one of the Republican Party's loudest opponents of government snooping until he left Congress in 2003, says the furor should stand as a test of Republicans' willingness to call their president to task. "This is just such an egregious violation of the electronic surveillance laws," Mr. Barr says.

Sen. Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who chairs the Judiciary Committee, has called the program "inappropriate" and promised to hold hearings early next year. Republicans joining him include centrist Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and John Sununu of New Hampshire, along with limited-government types like Larry Craig of Idaho.

Read the rest of this post...

While Bush was busy illegally spying on Americans, someone just stole 400 pounds of high-powered explosives including undetectable C-4

Seriously. This is the stuff used to blow up commercial airliners. Merry Christmas!

From ABC:

Officials are investigating the theft of 400 pounds of high-powered plastic explosives in New Mexico. The material was stolen from a bunker owned by a bomb expert who works at a national research lab outside Albuquerque, N.M.

ABC News has been told it's one of the most significant thefts of high-power explosives ever in the United States....

The missing 400 pounds of explosives includes 150 pounds of what is known as C-4 plastic, or "sheet explosive," which can be shaped and molded and is often used by terrorists and military operatives.

"It is a very dangerous material, we want to keep this off the streets," Cherry told ABC News.

Also, 2,500 detonators were missing from a storage explosive container, or magazine, in a bunker owned by Cherry Engineering....

And if that didn't scare you, get this:

The missing material included 150 pounds of the plastic explosive compound C-4 and 250 pounds of undetectable "sheet explosives" - a DuPont flexible explosive material that can be hidden in books and letters - as well as blasting caps, the news report said.

Did you get that? Read the rest of this post...

An Open Letter to Harry Reid

Not from me, but from The Left Coast:

I fervently hope, that as the most prominent Democratic spokesperson, you will also hasten to point out the toxic message of support that Bush and his patsies send to dictators and communists everywhere with their actions. A message that:

A capitalist liberal (libertarian) democracy is merely a theory that is unsustaniable under threat of war or terrorism

I strongly reject this terrible message and I urge you and the Democratic Party to do the same.

I sternly reject the notion perpetrated by Bush and his cronies that somehow American's admired liberal democratic traditions cannot be sustained in wars and in the fight against terrorism. President Bush, in his words and actions, has demonstrated that he is always quick to raise the white flag of surrender and cut and run from America's fundamental governing principles and philosophies. The words and actions of Bush and his blind supporters in Government and the media, regrettably, help America's enemies perpetrate the myth that people worldwide should abandon dreams of liberal democracy because such democracy is not possible under threats to the people's security. I simply and soundly reject this false notion and act of surrender to terrorists and communist dictators everywhere, an act that also deceives all our children - the future of America - into believing that you cannot have a liberal democracy in this world as long as there are terrorists around.

Read the rest of this post...

The Iraqi election success that wasn't

I guess if you stole an election to become President of the US, touting fraudulent elections isn't too much of a reach. It looks that whole Iraqi election success thing Bush has been crowing about is crumbling, not that he'd notice. He's got his spin and he is sticking to it:

Dozens of Sunni Arab and secular Shiite groups threatened to boycott Iraq's new legislature Thursday if complaints about tainted voting are not reviewed by an international body.

A representative for former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi described the Dec. 15 vote as "fraudulent" and the elected lawmakers "illegitimate."

A joint statement issued by 35 political groups that competed in last week's elections said the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq, which oversaw the ballot, should be disbanded.

Read the rest of this post...

Wash Post won't poll about impeachment because it's not a "serious" question

And the Post should know a thing or two about not being taken seriously.

And how is Bob Woodward?

More on the media's sudden interest in impeachment, and the Post's new depths of irrelevance, in E&P;. Read the rest of this post...

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Just start, please. Read the rest of this post...

Abramoff deal getting closer

The GOP wants everyone to think that the money went equally to both parties and now that he's cutting a deal we should be discovering just how equal that was. Everything out there now shows that Abramoff himself did not pass on anything to the Democrats while he was heaping mounds of cash on numerous GOP politicians. So will Congressman Ney (R-OH) stick around and fight or will he quickly pack his bags? Pull up a chair and get ready for the show. Read the rest of this post...

Big Brother UK style

Terrifying. What is with these so-called democratic countries that are giving in to the wackos and policing their own people? No wonder Bush and Blair love each other so much. Stalin would be proud.

"Every time you make a car journey already, you'll be on CCTV somewhere. The difference is that, in future, the car's index plates will be read as well," said Frank Whiteley, Chief Constable of Hertfordshire and chairman of the Acpo steering committee on automatic number plate recognition (ANPR).

"What the data centre should be able to tell you is where a vehicle was in the past and where it is now, whether it was or wasn't at a particular location, and the routes taken to and from those crime scenes. Particularly important are associated vehicles," Mr Whiteley said.

Read the rest of this post...

I did it, I bought the Mac laptop

The G4 Powerbook, 15 inch screen. I'd been researching it for 2 months now, since my laptop started acting up in early November, and based on the advice you guys gave me tonight, and the advice of several geek friends, I've decided to get it now rather than waiting for the new Intel-chip Macs that might have problems, being a first release (and I really need a laptop since my life is online - well, didn't mean that to sound as sad as it does). I also took your advice and went to the Apple store and got a refurbished model directly from Apple for $500 off, which was a couple hundred bucks LOWER than any other competitive price I could find on other vendors' Web sites. And finally, I got the 3 year Apple Care plan as everyone recommended, and as my geek friends recommended, and will buy the additional RAM separately.

And coolest of all, up until midnight tonight Apple was offering free next day delivery, so I might even get it as early as Friday, inshalla.

All in all I'm very pleased, and appreciate all the advice from you guys. Woo woo, I got an Apple, I got an Apple! :-) Read the rest of this post...

Another open thread

I'm off to bed. Unfortunately, now that the laptop is dead, you won't be getting any new pictures of Carmela the wonder dog this week :-( Gnite. Read the rest of this post...