John Conyers, Jr. - 40 Years Of Jobs, Justice And Peace
Main Index » Archives » April 2005 » The War on Judges

[Previous entry: "Voting Rights At Peril in Georgia, Indiana, other States"]
[MAIN INDEX]
[Next entry: "Special Interest Bankruptcy Bill on the Way"]

Blogged by JC on 04.04.05 @ 08:05 PM ET

The War on Judges
Irresponsible Rhetoric Can Lead to Tragic Results


During the protracted coverage and debate of the Schiavo matter, I was struck by the disrespectful and reckless language being used against judges. One by one, my Republican colleagues took the House floor to attack judges as "unconscionable," lacking "human compassion," needing to be held in "contempt," and having "answering to do." I remember thinking that such dehumanizing rhetoric is especially dangerous in these times towards anyone, let alone judges.

Outside the halls of Congress, words flew even more recklessly and the House Majority Leader Tom DeLay called the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube an "act of medical terrorism." The Reverend Pat Robertson called it "judicial murder."

I remember thinking about Judge Rowland Barnes of Georgia, who less than a month ago, was shot to death by an angry litigant in his courtroom, along with two other court employees. I remember thinking that irresponsible words can lead to tragic results. I thought of Judge Joan Lefkow, whose husband and mother are thought to have been murdered by an aggrieved litigant. Since then, I have been trying to think of the most appropriate forum to gently call this to my colleagues' attention, and to remind them that -- no matter how strong our feelings about individual decisions and cases, we need to be cognizant of the influence we may have -- especially on those that may be disturbed, and we always need to know that -- as elected officials -- our words have consequences.

That was to be a subtle message. It is unfortunate that today my message must be less subtle because things are very quickly spinning out of control.

First, the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, Tom DeLay, made the outrageous statement, and apparent threat, that "the time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior." When given repeated opportunities to disavow the interpretation of his comments as a threat or incitement to violence, DeLay has repeatedly declined to do so.

Tonight, my staff showed me a quote from Senator John Cornyn (found on Americablog) that speaks for itself: "And finally, I – I don't know if there is a cause-and-effect connection but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. Certainly nothing new, but we seem to have run through a spate of courthouse violence recently that's been on the news. And I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in -- engage in violence. Certainly without any justification but a concern that I have that I wanted to share."

This apparent effort to rationalize violence against judges is deplorable. On its face, while it contains doubletalk that simultaneously offers a justification for such violence and then claims not to, the fundamental core of the statement seems to be that judges have somehow brought this violence on themselves. This also carries an implicit threat: that if judges do not do what the far right wants them to do (thus becoming the "judicial activists" the far right claims to deplore), the violence may well continue.

If this is what Senator Cornyn meant to say, it is outrageous, irresponsible and unbecoming of our leaders. To be sure, I have disagreed with many, many court rulings. (For example, Bush v. Gore may well be the single greatest example of judicial activism we have seen in our lifetime.) But there is no excuse, no excuse, for a Member of Congress to take our discourse to this ugly and dangerous extreme.

My message is not subtle today. It is simple. To my Republican colleagues: you are playing with fire, you are playing with lives, and you must stop.

Senator Cornyn and Congressman DeLay should immediately retract these ill considered statements.

Replies: 134 Comments


Comment #1: Teresa said on 4/4/05 @ 8:14pm ET...

I am just hoping that this will enrage the judges enough to resist the attempt to take over the Judicial branch of the government. This might be the fuel to end this coup.



Comment #2: Teresa said on 4/4/05 @ 8:17pm ET...

And DeLay, of course, should be removed from his position. He is showing clear signs of mental dysfunction. But I think this is damaging the Republican Party even more, which is the silver lining.



Comment #3: Scott Hamlin said on 4/4/05 @ 8:38pm ET...

I congratulate you sir. I congratulate you on behalf of so many American's who share the spirit of Democracy, and are concerned that we're not headed in the direction with which our government classes taught, and our Bill of Rights promised, and our Constitution gauranteed.

I congratulate your heroic stands against a party who is abusing their majority position to reinvent America, and America's Constitution for the profligacy of power at the expence of the core principles that so many great men and women fought and died for, our nation.



Comment #4: Daniel Debowy said on 4/4/05 @ 8:45pm ET...

Thank you for standing up for the Constitution. The Founders are proud that you're in the Congress. I know I am.



Comment #5: dan corrigan said on 4/4/05 @ 8:47pm ET...

mr conyers, how come my rep, delahunt, isn't screaming about this? are you the only dem with a spine down there in washington? thank god for you, but curses to the bought-out dems for their complicity !!!



Comment #6: Raenelle Fisher said on 4/4/05 @ 8:48pm ET...

I couldn't believe anyone in a position of responsibility would make the kind of comments this Senator did. Thank you for speaking sense to dangerous nonsense.



Comment #7: Dan said on 4/4/05 @ 8:48pm ET...

The War on Activist Judges appears to be the Republican theme for 2006.

I pray that Senator Cornryn doesn't stir up any off centered people. This is serious.

The speech in all its glory (or most of it anyway), is on americablog.org. It only makes this small snippet look worse.



Comment #8: Dan said on 4/4/05 @ 8:50pm ET...

Cornyn. apologies



Comment #9: yasmeen evjenth said on 4/4/05 @ 8:52pm ET...

Thank you, sir, for saying this so plainly, and so well.



Comment #10: cyninbend said on 4/4/05 @ 8:54pm ET...

Has anyone ever doubted the complete hypocrisy of the current republican party? For years now, their claims of judicial activism have meant simply decisions they disagree with. Throughout the last election, nothing they said had any meaning--they would purposely misquote Kerry then campaign against the lie. This is more of the same.



Comment #11: Frederick said on 4/4/05 @ 8:54pm ET...

This is an outrage. Congressman DeLay and Senator Cornyn's statements, if made by an ordinary citizen, would rightly occasion inquiry and a visit from the FBI. It is unbelievable that members of the United States Congress, including the House Majority Leader, would say such things. These statements are particularly despicable coming in the wake of the murders of Judge Lefkow's husband and mother in Chicago, the murders of Judge Barnes and three others in Atlanta, and the arrests of various people who have threatened, or put bounties on the heads of, Judge Greer and/or Michael Schiavo. DeLay's and Cornyn's statements are further confirmation that the Republican Party has become a tool of the most dangerous elements of the Religious Right.



Comment #12: Janet Young said on 4/4/05 @ 8:57pm ET...

Hon. Mr. Conyers, once again you have made me proud to be a Democrat. You are the voice of good people everywhere who believe in common decency. Thank you.



Comment #13: filkertom said on 4/4/05 @ 8:59pm ET...

Thank goodness. One of the most direct statements against the madness, and it was by one of my governmental representatives -- which you truly are, as you REPRESENT the views I hold. Thank you, sir. Thank you so much for your courage and your eloquence.



Comment #14: Sondra said on 4/4/05 @ 9:00pm ET...

Mr. Conyers, thank you so much for always standing up for what you believe in. I just wish all the Democrats had the same courage you alway exhibit.



Comment #15: pegm said on 4/4/05 @ 9:07pm ET...

Thank you Rep. Conyers for speaking out against this outrage. I think many of us have come to expect no less from you.



Comment #16: William Danz said on 4/4/05 @ 9:08pm ET...

God bless you, Rep. Conyers. We need more elected officials with your courage and integrity.

And you couldn't be more correct about what these reckless statements are doing. They're setting the table for domestic terrorism, just like in Oklahoma City.



Comment #17: John Mulkerin said on 4/4/05 @ 9:09pm ET...

Thank you Mr. Conyers.
Can we clone your spine? There's some Democrats who are in sore need of one.



Comment #18: Richard C. said on 4/4/05 @ 9:13pm ET...

Mr. Conyers, my respect for you has grown tenfold since Nov. 2, 2004. Yours is one of the few voices of reason that remains in congress. Please continue the good fight. We desperately need voices of reason now more than ever.



Comment #19: Wile E. Odysseus said on 4/4/05 @ 9:15pm ET...

Mr. Conyers,

My hat's off to you!

I am glad someone is calling Sen. Cornyn on his ill-considered and ill advised remarks.



Comment #20: Tracy said on 4/4/05 @ 9:17pm ET...

Thank you Mr. Conyers. You have been an inspirational leader. One whom I admire greatly. Go get em'.



Comment #21: Archangel said on 4/4/05 @ 9:24pm ET...

Bravo, Mr.Conyers, Bravo!



Comment #22: aeb said on 4/4/05 @ 9:25pm ET...

No excuse.

Never an excuse.

The words you have written should be forwarded broadly, read carefully and supported fully. Run these dangerous fools out of town if they cross the line again.

Not one word more from them.



Comment #23: Montie Guthrie said on 4/4/05 @ 9:25pm ET...

As a Texan I should be accustomed to embarrassment, but this goes beyond the limits. Coryn should resign. If not he should be censured. Aaarrgggghhhhh!



Comment #24: Nora said on 4/4/05 @ 9:26pm ET...

Thank you, Mr. Conyers, for your stand in favor of the Constitution. I fear for my beloved country when I see and hear some of the irresponsible things that our so-called representatives do. It is good to see people like you standing up for the principles of our Founders.



Comment #25: Sue said on 4/4/05 @ 9:26pm ET...

Thank you for standing up to these people. They don't treasure or understand democracy. This may be just the beginning of a long fight.
StopActivistJudges.org
I hope i'm wrong.



Comment #26: Stuart Dryer said on 4/4/05 @ 9:27pm ET...

Sir,

You have spoken the plain truth. I wish that all Democrats would follow your lead and speak out on this and other political attrocities championed by right wing extremists.

The statements by these members of Congress have no place in civilized political discourse, but of course, we learned via the Swift Boat Veterans for the "Truth" that the discourse of the far right is whatever money will buy, unhampered by any qualms about truth, fair play or consistency.

So what is the correct response? Yours is certainly appropriate. Given that the actions of the far-right in the Schiavo case could best be described as loony, I wonder if there might be some value in attacking and ridiculing the attempt by Bill Frist to make a neurological diagnosis on the basis of a videotape, not to mention the blatant lies by DeLay about Ms. Schiavo's ability to speak and respond to stimuli.

I am not a politician, and maybe my view is naive, but I would argue that being polite has gotten us nowhere. So why not try something different? I think that the Democratic party has nothing to lose and everything to gain by calling as much attention to the fact that the far right grossly overplayed their hand this time.

Democrats are also on the winning side of the social security debate. You are winning and this is no time to back down.

It is time for the elected members of our party to start to take back this country.

Thank you sir, for showing an example to your colleagues.



Comment #27: Tabby Titsworth said on 4/4/05 @ 9:27pm ET...

Thank you, Mr. Conyers, for again doing the right thing. More and more we rely on you,and of course Senator Reid, to clean up the mess of the radical Republicans.

No good can come out of reckless and inflamatory comments hurled at our judges. Senator Cornyn must be held accountable for his vile words. Let us pray that no one of malice harms a judge because of the Republican senator from Texas's rabid rantings.

God bless.



Comment #28: Sarah Deere said on 4/4/05 @ 9:29pm ET...

Rep. Conyers,

Thank you for speaking out against this deplorable - and, as you point out - dangerous, inciteful behavior on the part of DeLay and Cornyn.

That they should be ashamed of themselves is a given; that they do not is predictable - and saddening.



Comment #29: Patton Zarate said on 4/4/05 @ 9:33pm ET...

Rep. Conyers,

Our adversaries do not understand that we all love America as much as they claim to and that we will stand up for the principles that made us love our great nation in the first place. Please continue your work; you are a salve to the wounds being inflicted upon the United States every day.



Comment #30: Rose said on 4/4/05 @ 9:35pm ET...

I was watching C-Span when Sen. Cornyn gave his speech. I was so shocked because he stated he was a judge for a number of years - and then degraded decisions of - epecially federal and the supreme court - judges and then the intelligence of judges! I can't say he had passion for his speech and thought it all disgusting, more so when he said anybody - you or I could easily make the decisions the judges make. Absolutely no respect. But he and his ilk must be desparate because they only have those very extreme right wing as their support. We have to fight Frist and prevent the Senate from changing the rules so Bush's nominees can't be filibustered. If you haven't contacted your senators, please do right away and say don't change the rules!



Comment #31: ruby said on 4/4/05 @ 9:37pm ET...

Thank you Rep. Conyers for truly representing us in the Detroit area. I'm glad to know that your staff reads the progressive blogs and that you have the courage to respond.



Comment #32: doug r said on 4/4/05 @ 9:45pm ET...

I saw the posting on AmericaBlog earlier. It infuriated me, but I didn't know exactly what to say.
Thank you for saying it so well.



Comment #33: Phoenix Woman said on 4/4/05 @ 9:46pm ET...

I've forwarded your blog post to some newspaper friends of mine. I hope they soon contact you for permission to reprint this in full.



Comment #34: An admirer from California said on 4/4/05 @ 9:49pm ET...

Thank you! Thank you! You do yourself and your party great credit!
It's heartening to know that someone is courageous enough to speak out in the face of such egregious rhetoric.



Comment #35: P. Sirkin said on 4/4/05 @ 9:49pm ET...

I am embarassed by this congress. Members like you Representative Conyors, make me proud at a time there is very little else to be proud of. Moreover, the judiciary is to be hailed for NOT knuckling under to blatant partisan cowtowing to a raqing FRINGE MINORITY.

At least the way I learned math, 80% of Americans opposed to a psuedo-christian theocracy constitues a WHOPPING MINORITY. 51% a mandate? HAHAHAHAHA
22% "morals" voters? A bare fifth!

KEEP IT UP REPRESENTATIVE. WE NEED MORE GOOD PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT LIKE YOURSELVES TO CONTROL THE CRAZIES.



Comment #36: Paul Sorrells said on 4/4/05 @ 9:51pm ET...

If these two ?representatives? of the people do not retract their statements, then they should either resign or be censured by other responsible adults in both houses of Congress.

Naaww, of course this won't happen, since a bunch of irresponsible nincompoops are running both of the People's legislative houses. When combined with the nuts running the White House, you can bet we haven't seen the worst yet of what these crazed, monopolistic, greedy people are capable of doing.

Sorry, folks, the Rubicon has been crossed and Caesar has ravaged one democratic institution after another in Washington.



Comment #37: DavidNYC said on 4/4/05 @ 9:55pm ET...

They *should* retract their statements? More like they *must* retract their statements.



Comment #38: from Texas said on 4/4/05 @ 10:07pm ET...

Thank you sir, for defending the rule of law when it needs defending most. Unfortunately Cornyn represents my state. You though, represent my heart.



Comment #39: Dr. Alan H. Levinson said on 4/4/05 @ 10:17pm ET...

Scariest thing in the world to me are the die-hards. Some of the most staunch republican, right-wing, conservative, religious zealots find this acceptable and downright pleasant. I also hear from most that this is how they felt during democratic reigns...that they were ignored, they felt railroaded, that this is retribution. I'm terribly sorry, but I don't ever remember hearing this kind of negative talk from republicans when dems were in office and in control.

I asked a question of a member of the Georgia house of representatives, a Mr. Forster at www.ronforster.blogspot.com who proceded to do what is typical of the current "zeitgeist" in America. As a result, I sent him, and many newspapers and editorial programs this letter.

I was wondering…do you even realize how the other half feels? Have you ever endeavored to, like Jesus said, place yourselves into the shoes of others in order to understand their experience. I recently wrote an e-mail letter to a member of The State House of Representatives in a state other than my own. He is a member of the Republican Party, and I am not. I asked a question regarding a topic that was posted on his web site. I promise that my question was responsible, polite, and was focused on a particular point of which I didn’t understand. I was only seeking clarification. The response I got was rather fascinating. First came the incredulousness…”how could you possibly ask and not just wholeheartedly agree with me”? Next came the name calling…”this is just a case of “sore-loser-itis and sour grapes”. Finally, the question was sidestepped, and some minor, insignificant detail within my letter was used to obfuscate the entire point.

Is it so totally unreasonable to be queried? Is it just possible that there may be some valid concern, without it being called 'sour grapes' or 'liberalism' and therefore worthy of being ignored. One might feel better if those in the majority ‘deigned’ to accept debate without such insecurity and look into methods of inclusion rather than exclusion. You know...a uniter, not a divider!! Personally, I am insulted by the name calling and think it unworthy of elected officials.

Mr. President, Mr. Vice-President (wherever you may be), Mr. Hassert, Mr. Frist, Mr. Delay, Ms. Rice, et.al., do you see yourselves somewhere in here?

Dr. Alan H. Levinson



Comment #40: Vicki Powers said on 4/4/05 @ 10:28pm ET...

Rep. Conyers, you speak for me and millions of other voters and the disenfranchised in this country that watch with extreme alarm the right wing political rhetoric that is fanning fascism in this country. Where is the "free press" ? When will other Democrats in Congress and the Senate join you in speaking out against this outrageous speech and conduct by official representatives of the United States of America?



Comment #41: alizaryn said on 4/4/05 @ 10:42pm ET...

I was watching C-Span today as Sen Cornyn spewed his Anti-Judicial (unless they happen to agree with your opinion) propoganda. I really thought I was hearing things when he came out with ...

"And finally, I – I don’t know if there is a cause-and-effect connection but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. Certainly nothing new, but we seem to have run through a spate of courthouse violence recently that’s been on the news. And I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in – engage in violence. Certainly without any justification but a concern that I have that I wanted to share."

I kept waiting for him to at the very least begin to backpedal, but he never did. I guess he thought "Certainly without any justification" as enough of a qualification.

This really crosses the line of sensibility.



Comment #42: valerie peiler said on 4/4/05 @ 10:43pm ET...

Thank you, Representative Conyers, for speaking up to preserve the precious system of checks and balances so brilliantly devised by the creators of this great republic. These are frightening times in which the voice of resistance must not be silent. Thank you for being that voice.



Comment #43: Sue Bertomeu said on 4/4/05 @ 10:44pm ET...

Dear Representative Conyers,

Thank you so much for speaking up and giving "We the People" a forum so that we can publically join you.

I'm so afraid of what is happening in our beloved country. You are right about America's very worst example of judicial activism.

Think of all of the lost lives lost as a result of Bush v Gore. Compare that to the one life that the far right is using to justify their excessively public display of outrage about 'life'.

We are in the second term of an illigitimate president who remains armed and dangerous.

I seriously think that you would make a great President and, since your not; I appreciate the leadership that you demonstrated through this and so many of your other amazing actions. You help to make our democracy a great adventure to participate in.

Thank you and bless you!



Comment #44: Carolyn said on 4/4/05 @ 10:50pm ET...

I thank you for your attempts to bring reason into this debate.

I completely agree that it is as irresponsible of Congress to make these sort of remarks as it would be for a teacher to tell a student to go ahead and take out their anger on a teacher....it is the most childish, inappropriate, and totally irresponsible thing I have heard lately.

In an era when we are combatting terrorism abroad, we seem to be willing to encourage it at home.

As a Texan, I am appalled, and embarrassed.

Thank you for taking a stand.



Comment #45: Ronny Venable said on 4/4/05 @ 10:53pm ET...

Here's what I wrote to Sen. Cornyn:

I understand you made the following comments on the floor of the Senate today:

"I don't know if there is a cause-and-effect connection but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. Certainly nothing new, but we seem to have run through a spate of courthouse violence recently that's been on the news and I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in - engage in violence."

if these were in fact your words, CONGRATULATIONS!! You've just pulled even with Tom DeLay and are tied for first place in the contest for who can make the vilest statements while degrading the Constitution and the political atmosphere and kissing a little partisan ass at the same time.

Your words are despicable and the fact that you would actually say such a thing on the floor of the U.S. Senate is proof in itself of your unworthiness to hold high office. Are you TRULY suggesting that the man who killed a judge and others in Atlanta was acting out of frustration with "judicial activism"? Was the man who murdered a federal judge's husband and mother in Chicago actually a patriotic hero who struck a blow for 'strict constructionism"? Is it possible that you really are as stupid as the statement would imply? Or were you trying to send a subtle message to the lunatics on the fringe that it is sometimes okay to kill a judge who disagrees with you?

Try taking a little refresher course in responsibility before you start running off at the mouth again.



Comment #46: ljm said on 4/4/05 @ 11:00pm ET...

First, I am thrilled to see so many new people leaving comments. May this blog continue to be read far and wide throughout the "internets."

Second, double talk and double standards bug me. I think they bug most people. Keep using those words and "frame" our message for the average person for plain spoken truth telling.



Comment #47: Leah A said on 4/4/05 @ 11:51pm ET...

What everyone else has said, plus a personal Thank-you, Mr. Conyers, for knowing what's right, and for never hesitating to say it, or to stand up and be counted.

I hope the Democrat Party as whole realizes the implications of what happened while America watched what went on in that whole Schiavo mess. Republicans and the right wing way over-reached, and the rest of America noticed. What they noticed we Democrats have known all along.

This is really one of those teachable moments, and I hope Democrats are prepared to make a real issue out of this Republican President and his congress seeking to pack the Federal courts with rightwing extremists, and to let people know in the most precise ways how the views of these Judicial nominees will have a direct impact on the personal lives of all Americans. America saw what that meant when they identified with Michael Schiavo and his wife's wishes rather than with the ideologues.

This is a whole new opporutnity to talk about the ethic of choice; I hope Democrats are prepared to take advantage of it.



Comment #48: Crackpot said on 4/4/05 @ 11:56pm ET...

Thank you for the writing this. The Republican Cowboys need to remember that they are supposed to represent all of us, even the 87% of Americans who backed Michael Schiavo's very difficult decisicon.

Charges should be filed against Tom DeLay, enough is enough.

A retraction is not enough, because those never make the news.



Comment #49: S. said on 4/5/05 @ 12:07am ET...

Thank you so much for this.



Comment #50: Doug Kenline said on 4/5/05 @ 12:25am ET...

Thanks for using the blog.

Someday the others in Congress will get a clue.

History will show that John Conyers of Michigan was the first.

Keep up the good work.



Comment #51: Howie said on 4/5/05 @ 12:42am ET...

Thank you Representative Conyers; you are an inspiration to us all. Please make sure these "people" pay the price for their crimes against our democracy.



Comment #52: Betty said on 4/5/05 @ 1:41am ET...

HR3799..The Constitution Restoration Act is absolutely despicable. Hell should be raised in no uncertain terms. Please do.
And thank you so much for standing your ground in this instance.



Comment #53: John said on 4/5/05 @ 2:11am ET...

Thank you for standing up for the judges and those of us who find these comments completely dispicable. We need more people like you in Congress!



Comment #54: Dr. P said on 4/5/05 @ 2:39am ET...

Mr. Conyers, you make me so happy that I decided to move back to my beloved home state of Michigan! Thank you, thank you, thank you!



Comment #55: expatjourno said on 4/5/05 @ 3:04am ET...

Thank you, Rep Conyers. Once again, your fundamental honesty and decency shines through.

It's time now for the other house to act. Time for a Senator to move for censure. Time to force the Rethuglicans to stand together and be counted or disown their thuggery. Time for democrats to make Rethuglicans pay a political price for cozying up to extremists.



Comment #56: Jon Koppenhoefer said on 4/5/05 @ 4:38am ET...

Not to foment anarchy or anything, but if Senator Cornyn was right, by now you'd think plenty of Congressmen and Senators would have been gunned down like dogs in the street.

But they haven't, leading me to believe Cornyn is wrong, or that the violent and irresonsibile rhetoric comes from the same camp that commits the rabid violence in this country.

Who shot JFK? Who shot Martin Luther King, Jr.,? Who shot Medgar Evers? Who shot Robert Kennedy? The list could go on and on, but I don't recall these men threatening anyone. They stood up to racists, warmongers, and the like, but they never threatened anything but an irresponsible and hateful way of life that some people wanted to hold onto.

Peaceful, loving--dare I say it--Christians don't threaten or commit violence against anyone. Period.

Senator Cornyn can rest easy tonight, and any night. He has nothing to fear from the liberals, or real Christians, or Muslims, or Buddhists, or Jews.

Maybe he should fear neo-nazis, white supremacists, racists, abortion-clinic bombers, and the like...but that's only if he says something they don't like to hear.



Comment #57: matthew c. said on 4/5/05 @ 8:40am ET...

Thank you, sir, for your fine work. I have seen nothing about this in the media, is anyone covering it? Or does right-wing domestic terrorism not count when we speak of "terrorism"?



Comment #58: Ohiodem1 said on 4/5/05 @ 8:54am ET...

The assualt on the American Court system has just begun. The hard right in America cannot stomach a co-equal branch of government that is charged by the Constitution to interpret and apply the laws that our Congress and Legislatures pass.

An independent judiciary is, by design of our Founding Fathers the dispute settling mechanism when parties or the other branches of government disagree.

On the question of "Activist Judges" vs "Strict Constructionists", those on the right view any judge who renders an opinion that in any way disagrees with any position they hold to be "Activist".

Conversely, they hold those opinions that agree with their side to be "Strict Construction". An argument can be made that from the time of "Marbury vs Madison" the case that established the authority for Judicial Review of law by our court system, almost all Supreme Court cases that are historic in nature fall into the category of "activist".

Dred Scott was activist. White vs Texas was activist. A whole series of activist decisions were handed down post 1937 by the Depression court, Brown vs Board of Education was activist. The Nixon tapes case was Activist, and the classic example of a dispute between Congress and the Executive. Finally, the Supreme Court ruling in the 2000 election was activist.

Without necessary activism, the court system in America is just a tool of tyranny or special interests. No effective court can be anything but activist. America is stronger with an independent court system. Government often oversteps the powers enumerated in the Constitution, and the American people need the protection of the courts when this happens.

The threats to the court system and the people in it, whether the threats are implied, veiled, or explicit must stop. America cannot have it any other way.



Comment #59: Diana Slivinska said on 4/5/05 @ 9:36am ET...

Thank you again, Rep. Conyers, for having the courage to speak the plain truth.

I would first like to know why Messrs. DeLay and Cornyn think that they will not be answerable for their words and actions. In all their calls for judges to be answerable, it seems they have not thought that the same standard applies to them. It is my fervent hope that the good people of their state will hold them accountable for their reckless words, which in my view amount to an incitement to violence against judges. I believe that their irresponsible words encourage terrorism against judges. I do not believe it is acceptable to incite violence against any person, no matter how much I might disagree with their views.

Secondly, I am appalled by the lack of understanding of our form of government. Lately, I have read a great many letters to the editors of various publications screaming about how we are supposed to have "majority rule" in this country. These people obviously have no understanding of the Constitution, and the way in which the branches of our government were set up to provide protections for people who are not in the majority. It appears that many people in both houses of the Congress demonstrate a similar lack of understanding. It is bad enough for laypeople to be so ignorant, but members of Congress should know better. Have they never studied civics?

I don't know the answer to the deplorable state of public ignorance concerning our government and the function of its branches. I do remember that my high school civics class was not well-taught nor interesting; I didn't develop a real appreciation for the Constitution until law school. True, I had some idea about the Bill of Rights, but I did not grasp the doctrine of Separation of Powers nor checks and balances until adulthood.

Perhaps those of us who are concerned about public ignorance could do something to educate people. Having information available is good (on the web, etc.), but it is likely to be seen only by those who are actively seeking it. Could we try to address various community groups? Speak to organizations? Perhaps speak to high school students in the context of their history or civics classes? As I said, I don't know the answers, but I'm willing to try.

Thanks again for your courageous stand. We decidedly need more people like you in the Congress.



Comment #60: Paul said on 4/5/05 @ 10:18am ET...

Dear Rep. Conyers,

Once again, my heartfelt thanks! :)

I have been reading a blog called "Abstract Appeal" run by a Florida lawyer. This is from his "about" page:

(quote)
I'm Matt Conigliaro, an appellate attorney with Carlton Fields. I live and work in St. Petersburg, Florida and am board-certified by The Florida Bar in appellate practice.
(/quote)

http://abstractappeal.com/

So, he understands the Judicial system very well, and also the Appeals process. He has been following the Schiavo case since it was first brought to trial years ago. He is certainly very qualified to comment on the legal aspects of the case. I was going to copy some of the more pertinent comments or statements here. But the fact is, there is a great deal. He has links to all the available documents posted by both sides of the dispute and the court rulings. There is much information there, so I shall somply post the link and all those so inclined can read it all for themselves.

I *seriously* recommend that anyone who is interested in the truth should go there, but I will post this comment:

(quote)
I remain befuddled that while hundreds of documents and other items concerning Terri and Michael have been replicated time and again across the Internet, prompting people around the world to second-guess the trial's result, the transcripts of the trial itself are not among the items in circulation. How can that be? Surely the parties have copies of the trial transcript. Shouldn't it be the one thing everyone should want to see before attempting to cast judgment on the propriety of the trial's result?
(/quote)

For me, that says it all. There are way too many ignorant people saying things they hear or read with no attempt to check it's validity or accuracy.

This is one of the very few unbiased (either way) and succinct pieces of journalism I have read since 2000.

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/04/03/Perspective/Before_the_circus.shtml

So, what does all this have to do with the current attacks on the Judiciary? Perhaps this will help explain (free registration is required):

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-filibuster4apr04,1,5240991.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack;=3&cset;=true

As posted at Shocked and Awfull:

(quote)
Senate is Primed for Filibuster Showdown.

There is little hope that a compromise can head off GOP plans to change the rules so Democrats can no longer block federal judicial picks.

After months of taunts and threats, Republicans and Democrats are preparing to escalate a conflict over what each side describes as the "nuclear option" — changing the rules for confirming federal judges.

"What is driving … the Senate toward conflict is this White House's efforts to create unnecessary confrontation over judicial nominees," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. "The president insisted on renominating troublesome and divisive choices, rather than working with us to find more consensus nominees who would be fair judges."
(/quote)

I suspect THAT is what the current noise and stupidity is all about. The usual GOP intimidation and fear tactics so they can get their way. They do not (and have NEVER) cared about the Schiavo's or anyone else involved. This sad case was simply a means to an end. At least, for the GOP Politicians and businessmen with vested intrests. They knew they could rely on their drones to cause trouble.

Thanks again.



Comment #61: Paul said on 4/5/05 @ 10:42am ET...

Sorry, I meant to add this little gem:

Constitution Restoration Act
This legislation will "RESTORE OUR CONSTITUTION!", mainly by barring ANY federal court or judge from ever again reviewing "any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government."

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=104&ItemID;=7569

Text of the proposal is here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.520:



Comment #62: John Burik said on 4/5/05 @ 11:06am ET...

Representative Conyers,

Thank you for your courageous stand on this and other issues such as electoral reform.



Comment #63: Sheri said on 4/5/05 @ 11:12am ET...

Thank you, Rep. Conyers! I was born and raised in Detroit and I am proud to claim you as my own even though I now reside in Stone Mountain, GA.

Thank you for caring enough and being courageous enough to stand and give voice to the fight for the survival of our Constitution! Indeed, I NEVER thought I'd live to see the day when power drunk politicians would seek to turn this country into a theocracy and DESTROY it! I salute you!



Comment #64: DL said on 4/5/05 @ 11:37am ET...

Rep. Conyers:

Thank you!
Once again, you show your courage, honesty and love of America through your strong words of Truth.
America is clearly in crisis, although too many citizens seem woefully unaware of this dangerous state of affairs.

Thank you for being a shining light in this dark hour.

Never give up fighting
the good fight!

DL



Comment #65: jo c said on 4/5/05 @ 11:47am ET...

Thank you, I have written my NY senators and was hoping to see a response to this outage from them, but you said it succintly , and I hope others will hear the message.
I have pleaded with Sen Clinton over and over not to compromise with these wingnuts, there's nothing in it for us , but the end of democracy as we know it.
again ,thanks for your courage.



Comment #66: Susan said on 4/5/05 @ 12:04pm ET...

It is surprising that Senator Cornyn would speak so, since he, unlike so many of the republican legislators and executive branch personnel, is a LAWYER with a arguably distinguished past as a Texas Supreme Court Justice.

However, it seems that he was trying to justify Tom DeLay's outrageous (and possibly criminal) comments promising retibution against the forty or some odd judges who refused to bend to Mr. DeLay on the Schiavo matter.

Sometimes I think that the root of the over-heated rhetoric of the republicans is because they don't understand that they now have control of all branches of government. They have become so accustomed to critique, derision, and blaming that they have not noticed that they are now accountable for results. They can only voice martyrdom and victimhood. Yet the whole country is the victim now.

The politicians who stand against these types of threats are patriots. Thank you, Rep. Conyers.



Comment #67: Racquel said on 4/5/05 @ 12:40pm ET...

Thank you for those much-needed words. I see the very future of this fine nation is at risk by a group of power-hungry theocrats. You are a fine patriot and you make me proud to be a member of the Democratic party.



Comment #68: Larry said on 4/5/05 @ 12:56pm ET...

Dear Representative Conyers,

Thank you for daring to say what so many Democratic elected officials seem unwilling to acknowledge--that the current Republican administration is willing to sacrifice everything that made this country great, just so that they can assure themselves that 4 million religious zealots will support their party in the next election.

Senator Cornyn's remarks were not only off-target, as the murders he refers to were the result of non-political cases, but divisive and subversive. Rather than decrying the murder of judges, he rationalized it. He deserves the censure of his colleagues.

I regret that Senator Cornyn is my Senator, by dint of my residence in Texas. I am disgusted by both his politics and his justification of homicide.

The residents of your district in Michigan are lucky to have such a strong leader representing their interests in Congress. Good luck to you, sir! God bless America, and illegitimi non carborundum est.



Comment #69: Sally said on 4/5/05 @ 1:15pm ET...

Like so many Texas Republican politicians, Cornyn is a complete disgrace. I, too, regret he passes as my Senator since I am opposed to almost everything he stands for.



Comment #70: Susan Lewis said on 4/5/05 @ 2:15pm ET...

Don't let us Texas residents have all the fun! Show Senator Cornyn what you think of his incitement to violence against the judiciary of our country at:

cornyn.senate.gov/contact/index.html

I'm sure he will be happy he heard your opinion. Are DeLay and Cornyn just an embarassment and in need of a civics lesson or are they a danger to our form of government?uI



Comment #71: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 2:20pm ET...

Congressman Conyers, who appeared with New Black Panther leader Malik Shabazz in August 2000 when Shabazz said, "for every casket and funeral in our community there should be a casket and funeral in the enemy’s community" (in effect calling for racial killing of whites), knows something about violent rhetoric.

Of course Conyers said nothing to criticize or contradict Shabazz's violent, racist rhetoric.

And where was Congressman Conyers' outrage when his fellow leftists were calling Justice Thomas an "Uncle Tom" and a "lawn jockey" etc.?



Comment #72: Leslie said on 4/5/05 @ 2:27pm ET...

It is encouraging to see so many responses to this truly important matter.

It's now becoming clear that the extreme right-wing will do anything to stack the courts with judges sympathetic to their causes. I don't know why I didn't see the pattern before, but I do now. It certainly appears that the Schiavo case was and still is being exploited to bring attention to the Judicial Branch. The one branch the extreme right does not control.

Note the keynote speakers at Confronting the Judicial War on Faith. This is the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration's first conference. (And the use of fighting words... "War on Faith"). And thank you Sue for providing a link to that site.

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS INCLUDE
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, David C. Gibbs, Esq., attorney for Terri Schiavo's parents, Chief Justice Roy Moore and former Ambassador Alan Keyes.

OUR FOCUS
THIS WILL BE AN ACTION-ORIENTED CONFERENCE SEEKING SOLUTIONS, AS WELL AS THE BEGINNING OF A BROAD-BASED EFFORT TO SAVE AMERICA FROM THE JUDGES

This is scary stuff folks. Go take a look! I wonder if the people who voted for DeLay expected him to tackle these issues on their behalf. I think it's time we vote out Legislators that are not working for the good of all citizens of the United States.

There are 3 branches of government for a reason. We need to save the Constitution from these extremists!



Comment #73: Tim Collier said on 4/5/05 @ 2:35pm ET...

Thank you for this responsible and much-needed statement. These people are playing with fire, and certainly ought to know better.



Comment #74: Jack said on 4/5/05 @ 2:46pm ET...

Nice try Ken. The Shabazz comment is disgusting, but the inference that Conyers and others stood idly by while he made it is a lie perpetuated by conservative huckster David Horowitz. Sell your propaganda to Rush Limbuagh or Hannity or someone who might actually be stupid enough to believe it.



Comment #75: roberto morales said on 4/5/05 @ 2:49pm ET...

Rep. Conyers,

you have my respect.



Comment #76: Lauri said on 4/5/05 @ 2:52pm ET...

Yes, this is definitely scary.

What ever happened to the "compassionate conservative?" What ever happened to the Republican edict that "We want to improve your life, not run it?" Isn't passing a law for a specific person interfering with our personal rights? Isn't religious and moral belief an individual/personal right?

President Bush's statement that we should always error on the side of life is probably somewhat true. But after 15 years? Is lying in a bed, doing absolutely NOTHING really life? The only reason Terry's parents wanted her alive was for themselves, certainly not for Terry.

How many times have I heard from the religious zealots that "god" wants this woman to live? How can you be sure? Perhaps God wanted to take her 15 years ago, and the medical world has kept her out of God's hands for that long.

Most judges are fair, concerned-for-justice people. I applaud the hard decisions the involved judges had to make during the past 7 years during the Shiavo case.

And I shake my head on some things said by some judges. Can you image sitting in an synagogue, listening to Justice Scalia telling you that you should be glad Christians are in charge? Perhaps we should dip down to the low level of the Tom Delays of this world and suggest everyone stone Scalia for such rude comments.

I, for one, am very frightened about how the land of the brave and the home of the free is becoming the land of the brave and the home of the free only if you're a rightwing Christian.



Comment #77: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 3:21pm ET...

Jack,
The one lying is you. Conyers DID stand idly by. I saw the event on C-SPAN. Your ad hominem drivel about Horowitz and Limbaugh will not change that fact.



Comment #78: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 3:23pm ET...

Leslie,
Its' been clear for years that the extreme left-wing will do anything to stack the courts with judges sympathetic to their anti-constitutional causes.



Comment #79: Kathleen said on 4/5/05 @ 3:36pm ET...

Thank you, Sir, for your courageous efforts on behalf of ALL Americans in collecting and trying to call attention to the overwhelming evidence of irregularities in the election of 2004; and now in speaking out against the right wing's appalling "war on judges." You are a hero, sir. The people of Michigan are fortunate to have you as their representative, and we outside your home state, who love this country so much yet fear for its future, are lucky to have you on our side. Keep up the good work, Sir, and know that we are behind you all the way.



Comment #80: Leslie said on 4/5/05 @ 3:41pm ET...

Ken ... Please present some examples or links about the extreme-left so that we will all know what you are referring to.

And for the record, I do not think we should have extremists as judges, whether they are left or right leaning.

It is good that Congress cannot break a filibuster with a simple majority vote. This encourages more thoughtful nominations of jurists who are moderate, agreeable to all sides, and will interpret the law fairly and equitably.



Comment #81: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 3:48pm ET...

"This encourages more thoughtful nominations of jurists who are moderate, agreeable to all sides, and will interpret the law fairly and equitably."

Nonsense. The Democrats don't want moderate judges who interpret the laws. They want activists who will make laws. Two well known examples of this phenomenon are Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas.



Comment #82: Galen said on 4/5/05 @ 3:58pm ET...

Hey Ken, great illustration of the GOP and Faux News weasel method of dealing with criticism.

Bush dodged the draft? Well, one of Kerry's medals was awarded in questionable circumstances, so who is he to talk?

GOP congressmen are implicitly threatening judges who don't tow their party line? Well, a fellow congressman who condemns this language once stood next to a guy in a known activist group who made some reactionary remarks, so who is he to criticize?

That's Ken, keeping it "fair and balanced", even when the situations are barely comparable. Hey buddy, how about responding to the actual points in Rep. Conyers' letter instead of playing the weasel misdirection game? Or are you like Dave Chappelle on the OJ Simpson jury selection panel ... "Sir, my Republicanness will not permit me to answer that question."



Comment #83: Jack said on 4/5/05 @ 4:06pm ET...

What you, like Limbaugh and Horowitz leave out, is that the event you are discussing was the "redeem the dream" rally on the mall to commermerate the life and works of Martin Luther King.

Among the "extreme left" who "stood idly by," was Martin Luther King III and Coretta Scott King. A couple of contemparaneous accounts are below --

But, this is your same old tired right wing technique -- distract and smear. Cornyn said what he said. DeLay said what he said. You are taking Congressman Conyers to task for something someone else supposedly said.

And we have to take your word that Conyers heard or was aware of what the gentleman said, had the oppotunity to address it and chose not to. Forgive me if your recollection of what you saw on C-span is not good enough.



Thousands rally to 'redeem the dream'
August 26, 2000
Web posted at: 9:40 p.m. EDT (0140 GMT)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this story:

'That day ... is not today'

Police chief says problem exists

RELATED STORIES, SITES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Thousands rallied Saturday along the Capitol Mall in the footsteps of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to "redeem the dream" spelled out 37 years ago and to call for an end to the racial profiling and police brutality that many say are keeping that dream from becoming reality.

"My father stood not far from here, trying to redeem the soul of America," said Martin Luther King III, the son of the civil rights leader, on the 37th anniversary of Dr. King's moving "I Have a Dream" oratory .

VIDEO
CNN's Miles O'Brien interviews activist the Rev. Al Sharpton

Play video
(QuickTime, Real or Windows Media)


"I challenge you to ensure that he did not die in vain."

"If you understand what consciousness is, if you understand the wrongness of police brutality and racial profiling ... allow your conscience to be your guide and abolish racial profiling," King exhorted politicians and voters alike.

Civil rights leaders met with senior Clinton administration officials a day earlier to press for an executive order that would ban racial profiling -- a practice in which police stop a suspect based on the color of his or her skin -- throughout the federal government and discontinue federal funds to any state or local law enforcement agency with a pattern of police brutality and racial profiling.

'That day ... is not today'
"While my father had an incredible dream of 'one day,' that day clearly and sadly is not today," said King on Saturday. "There are those who would have you believe that in 2000, over three decades after the assassination of my father, we now live in a color-blind, gender-blind, age-blind, religion-blind, class-blind society. Perhaps they're so blind that they cannot see the sobering reality around us."

The Rev. Al Sharpton, who was among those in meetings at the White House, on Saturday reminded Clinton that he has enjoyed the support of black voters throughout his two terms in office, even during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. "We helped to make sure you had that time," Sharpton said of the president's remaining months in office, "You need to use that time to make a message ... that racial profiling must end."

Clinton a year ago ordered the Justice Department to collect data on the use of racial profiling. But Sharpton said on Friday, "That's not enough. We want results."

That feeling was echoed Saturday by the mother of shooting victim Amadou Diallo, who in 1999 was gunned down by police in a hail of bullets as he stood unarmed outside his Brooklyn apartment. The four white police officers involved in the shooting were later acquitted.

Kadiatou Diallo told the crowd that in March she joined a group of black leaders to ask the Justice Department to pursue federal prosecution of the police officers. "We were told a decision would be made within weeks. It is now almost six months and nothing has been done," she said. "This is not justice. We want justice."

Among the long list of black political and civil rights leaders on the stage Saturday was Abner Louima, the Haitian immigrant beaten and sodomized by police in Brooklyn in 1997.

"When they want to seek our vote, they know where to reach us," Louima said in halting English. "But I don't see most of them here with us. They know we exist when they need to be elected, but after the election they become blind and deaf when it comes to our problems. ... We demand the government to use its power, as one of the greatest nations in the world, to end police brutality, to end racial profiling," Louima said.

The issue is particularly ticklish for the federal government. An administration official has told CNN the two agencies for which racial profiling is an issue -- the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Customs Department -- rely on racial characteristics when deciding whether to detain someone crossing the border or inspect goods being brought into the country.

But black leaders on Saturday condemned what they see as the broad discrepancy in the treatment of whites and blacks by police. Blacks make up 62 percent of the country's prison inmates, King said, a figure that is far disproportionate to their percentage of the population.

"There is no contradiction between effective law enforcement and respect for civil and human rights," said Dorothy Height of the National Council of Negro Women. "Dr. King did not stir us to move for our civil rights to have them taken away in these kinds of fashions."

Police chief says problem exists
In an interview with CNN, Police Chief Edward Flynn of Arlington, Virginia, agreed there is a problem, but said it exists mainly in places where police don't have a connection with their communities.

"The randomness of police tactics, police tactics applied without the knowledge of local turf, without being able to draw intelligent distinctions between possible suspects and people who aren't suspects, it's what ... has gotten us into this soup," Flynn said.

Sharpton called on both presidential candidates, Vice President Al Gore and Texas Gov. George W. Bush, to pledge their support for the racial profiling executive order.

"Both of you are running for president, but you can't run from us," he said. "If you want us, you have to come to us and address our concerns."

Many speakers urged African Americans to take their concerns to the ballot box. Echoing his father's words of 37 years ago, King told the crowd that the most important step is "is the short step to the ballot box."

"On November 7 we must cast our votes if we want to redeem the dream."

Organizers of the event estimated the turnout Saturday at 100,000. They had a permit for up to 30,000 people at the National Mall.

The crowd in front of the Lincoln Memorial lined about half of each side of the 440-yard-long reflecting pool.

Many people held banners and signs. While people came from across the country to attend the event, most were from the East Coast.

Vicki Hubbard, 47, a music teacher from Lynchburg, Virginia, came with her church group.

"Most of us were either too young or not even born when they held the first march," she said. "We wanted to come and be a part of the cause and part of the history."

(Post Edited by Administrator for Length)



Comment #84: Galen said on 4/5/05 @ 4:20pm ET...

Ken, you may want to check your facts before posting in the future. Of course, I won't hold my breath.

Let's consider Roe v. Wade. Five of the seven justices who voted with the majority, including Chief Justice Burger, were appointed by Republican presidents (3 by Nixon, 2 by Ike). One of the three Democratic appointees, Justice White, sided with Rehnquist on the dissenting side.

Not exactly the best illustration of how only Democrats stack the court with liberal activist judges who make law.

I would love to hear your argument that a strict interpretation of the Constitution would never have resulted in legalizing a women's right to choose.



Comment #85: Leslie said on 4/5/05 @ 4:21pm ET...

Ken, I am a Democrat and I am for moderation. So your blanket statement, "The Democrats don't want moderate judges who interpret the laws. They want activists who will make laws.", is false.

I said nothing about Republican vs Democrat. I was referring to extremists of any kind. And in my opinion the organization I referenced presenting the conference, "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith", have extreme ideas. They want judges to interpret morality. I want judges to interpret the laws.



Comment #86: anwar said on 4/5/05 @ 4:24pm ET...

Where is my turkey?!?!?!?



Comment #87: barbara mikulski said on 4/5/05 @ 4:38pm ET...

I'd be happy to put out a statement condemning my colleague Sen. Cornyn, but my schedule is full. Today I have to cut the ribbon at a new gas station in Glen Burnie, and then rush off to a pothole-filling ceremony in Bowie. I must be very important, because I'm so busy.



Comment #88: paul sarbanes said on 4/5/05 @ 4:39pm ET...

You're so right, Babs. I was going to say something about not killing judges, but I need to rush home right this minute. I have a whole stack of lace doilies I simply must iron tonight.



Comment #89: Jack said on 4/5/05 @ 4:49pm ET...

More right wing trolls. New one named Anwar. so many lies so little time...

All Rights Reserved
Detroit Free Press

January 8, 2005 Saturday 1 EDITION

LENGTH: 254 words

HEADLINE: Conyers gives food bank answer on turkeys

BYLINE: BY JOEL THURTELL; FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

BODY:

The head of Gleaners Community Food Bank said Friday that U.S. Rep. John
Conyers, D-Mich., has provided him with an accounting of what happened to 60
Thanksgiving turkeys ....
"It appears to me that they have in fact accounted for all 60 turkeys, "
said Agostinho Fernandes, executive director of the food bank in Detroit.



Comment #90: Faith said on 4/5/05 @ 5:14pm ET...

Let's call this vendetta against the judges exactly what it is - political jealousy because there is a lack of control over these individuals.

We need all the checks and balances and the current administration is trying erease all the boundaries.

Whether we agree with the court decisions or not, we need to stand united for the separation of the three branches of government.

Thanks for listening.



Comment #91: The Witch said on 4/5/05 @ 5:42pm ET...

Rep. Conyers,

If you ever feel like going out to dinner with one of your admirers, I live in DC. :)

You are one of the few who really do what you're supposed to. Please keep it up and keep talking to the people. We need you to.

I keep typing Senator before your name and going back to correct myself. You inspire that much respect in me. May everyone else who is privileged to work with you share that respect and see you for the true public servant that you are.



Comment #92: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 6:11pm ET...

Galen,
Bush didn't dodge the draft. Since you'll lie and smear like that, we know you can't be trusted on anything.

Delay's comments did not in any way condone violence. Cornyn's comments did not in any way condone violence.



Comment #93: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 6:15pm ET...

Jack,
If a Republican Congressman was at a public rally where the speaker at the podium right before him said "we ought to kill more black people" you and Conyers would be screaming about it, and you know it.

Delay's comments did not in any way condone violence. Cornyn's comments did not in any way condone violence.



Comment #94: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 6:18pm ET...

Galen said, "Five of the seven justices who voted with the majority, including Chief Justice Burger, were appointed by Republican presidents (3 by Nixon, 2 by Ike). One of the three Democratic appointees, Justice White, sided with Rehnquist on the dissenting side."

Is Galen too stupid to understand that a liberal Republican like Nixon could appoint a liberal (i.e. activist) justice? Or is he being disingenuous about it?



Comment #95: peter claussen said on 4/5/05 @ 6:40pm ET...

thank you for standing up to clearly and bravely say these courageous things. someone needs to hold these bullyboys accountable.



Comment #96: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 6:53pm ET...

You're welcome peter.



Comment #97: Teresa said on 4/5/05 @ 7:21pm ET...

Ken, not good. This is serious.

The difference of opinion you hold can be argued on many fronts, but not now. Not on this one.



Comment #98: Ken said on 4/5/05 @ 8:02pm ET...

I have no idea what you're referring to, Teresa.



Comment #99: Paul said on 4/5/05 @ 8:08pm ET...

Awwww.... C'mon ladies, Ken is just annoyed 'cause Barbie has a headache... permanently! :D

Hmmmm... Leslie #72, thanks for that! Very interesting, and worrying. :(

I am still very troubled by this peice of garbage, and would like to know why there is little or no discussion about this!

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.520:

Especially because it seems to have the backing of DeLay and others involved in the recent attrocios conduct! (Thanks for that link Leslie).

http://www.stopactivistjudges.org/

Insane!



Comment #100: Mike said on 4/5/05 @ 8:22pm ET...

If there was such a thing as "justice", Delay would be gone a long time ago.

There isn't. The key to successful corruption is, clearly, the elimination of all possible opposition. That's how the disgusting "Hammer" does his thing.

There is only one peaceful, dignified way to fight these cretins - cutting off their oxygen.

Go to the Center for Responsive Politics website, look at what corporations give $ to Delay and his right-wing wacko cronies, and STOP giving those corporations your money. If you're too lazy to sort it out, go to www.buyblue.org. The Dems may not be much better, but at a bare minimum stop aiding and abetting the worse side.



Comment #101: Galen said on 4/5/05 @ 10:01pm ET...

Ken moves the goalposts and dodges the issues yet again! I see he's a devoted follower of the Limbaugh school of debate. I.e., don't debate the issues, instead attack the people on the other side.

Point 1: I wasn't arguing that Bush dodged the draft. I was recalling the typical weasel GOP response to accusations that Bush dodged the draft: turn it back on the accuser rather than address the arguments. Your predictable response wonderfully demonstrates this method.

Point 2: So Nixon doesn't count because he was a "liberal Republican", which affiliates him with the "extreme left wing" (your own words) in judicial appointments? Funny, your original, completely unsupported point makes no mention of such an affiliation. What about Ike? Was he a radical liberal too? Pardon me while I dodge a few of these moving goalposts!

Okay I'm done playing with Ken. He's really just a run-of-the-mill conservative dittohead troll. I was hoping he'd actually address Conyers' points and defend his own statements, but I'm also hoping to find the winning lottery ticket on my walk home tonight. Both are about as likely.



Comment #102: Crackpot said on 4/6/05 @ 12:04am ET...

Hey Ken,

Strangely enough I got sent a virus sent to me right around the same time you posted something... huh.

Could this be yet another case of some Cry-Baby Republican attacking people because he didn't get his way?

Next time just come with a good argument,jackass.

Go figure,



Comment #103: Crackpot said on 4/6/05 @ 12:25am ET...

Oh and I know because this is the referring address. At about the same time...



Comment #104: crackpot said on 4/6/05 @ 12:30am ET...

Also Rep. Conyers,

Please try and convert Rep. Shays to the Democratic Party. He is that last Republican who is truly a good man and knows who Teddy Roosevelt was.

He actually listens to his people. Don't always agree with him, but I do respect him.



Comment #105: Paul said on 4/6/05 @ 2:40am ET...

More on DeLay's *ethics* (I know, that word shouldn''t even be on the same page as DeLay)...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/politics/06delay.html?ex=1270440000&en;=7e2ad081118890cd&ei;=5088&partner;=rssnyt

(quote)
WASHINGTON, April 5 - The wife and daughter of Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by Mr. DeLay's political action and campaign committees, according to a detailed review of disclosure statements filed with the Federal Election Commission and separate fund-raising records in Mr. DeLay's home state, Texas.
(/quote)

Nice work if you can get it! Hmmmm...



Comment #106: Paul said on 4/6/05 @ 2:43am ET...

Oh look!! Here's another....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28319-2005Apr5.html

(quote)
A six-day trip to Moscow in 1997 by then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was underwritten by business interests lobbying in support of the Russian government, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the trip arrangements.

DeLay reported that the trip was sponsored by a Washington-based nonprofit organization. But interviews with those involved in planning DeLay's trip say the expenses were covered by a mysterious company registered in the Bahamas that also paid for an intensive $440,000 lobbying campaign.
(/quote)

Yeah... Again, nice wok if you can get it! :(



Comment #107: Paul said on 4/6/05 @ 2:56am ET...

Oops! Sorry for the typo (funny thougH!) wok is work, of course! ;) :D

Anyway... For quite a detailed blog on Cornyn's ridiculous remarks, see this:

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2005/04/how_to_do_thing.html

Apart from the initial commments by Matthew, there are quite a number of links back to other blogs and websites about this in the following reader comments. Seems to be a lot of outrage out there! Good!



Comment #108: Paul said on 4/6/05 @ 9:29am ET...

I came across this summary of DeLay's career. Seems you need a hell of a lot more than 3 strikes to be out in the Republican camp! I find this especially hypocritical given that the Republicans consider that one strike is out for any Democrat!

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=430

(quote)
DeLay’s Dirty Dozen

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay has been a busy man these last few years. Whether bribing congressmen, threatening political opponents, vacationing with lobbyists, or gutting House ethics rules, it’s been hard to keep up with all the Hammer’s activities. Here are twelve highlights from DeLay’s illustrious career.
(/quote)

Gee.... Can't you just see what a great Christian he is??

No? Me either!

Also, I found this interesting (and thought provoking!) at TruthOut:

http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/3/25/10383/0260

(quote)
Rank hypocrisy, of course, is as constant as the North Star. We have progressed beyond hypocrisy this week, however, and are barnstorming towards a kind of fundamentalist theocracy that is cancerous to the basic underpinnings of the republic.

First question: Who is actually running the country? The easy answer is George W. Bush, President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief. An easy answer, but wrong. As has been conclusively proven, no catastrophe or threat can dislodge George when he has boll-weevled into his Crawford ‘ranch’ for some sorta-earned vacation time. Yet last week, in the dead of night, he boarded his chariot (which flies at $34,000 per hour using your taxpayer money, by the way) and raced back to Washington to sign that ‘Save Terri’ legislation.

At whose request? Why, at the request of Rep. Tom Delay. The warnings in the summer of 2001 about an imminent and massive terror attack on the United States could not dislodge George from his repose, but DeLay crooks his little finger and George comes a-runnin’.
(/quote)

Yeah... makes you think!



Comment #109: Paul said on 4/6/05 @ 9:34am ET...

I came across this summary of DeLay's career. Seems you need a hell of a lot more than 3 strikes to be out in the Republican camp! I find this especially hypocritical given that the Republicans consider that one strike is out for any Democrat!

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=430

(quote)
DeLay’s Dirty Dozen

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay has been a busy man these last few years. Whether bribing congressmen, threatening political opponents, vacationing with lobbyists, or gutting House ethics rules, it’s been hard to keep up with all the Hammer’s activities. Here are twelve highlights from DeLay’s illustrious career.
(/quote)

Gee.... Can't you just see what a great Christian he is??

No? Me either!

Also, I found this interesting (and thought provoking!) at TruthOut:

http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/3/25/10383/0260

(quote)
Rank hypocrisy, of course, is as constant as the North Star. We have progressed beyond hypocrisy this week, however, and are barnstorming towards a kind of fundamentalist theocracy that is cancerous to the basic underpinnings of the republic.

First question: Who is actually running the country? The easy answer is George W. Bush, President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief. An easy answer, but wrong. As has been conclusively proven, no catastrophe or threat can dislodge George when he has boll-weevled into his Crawford ‘ranch’ for some sorta-earned vacation time. Yet last week, in the dead of night, he boarded his chariot (which flies at $34,000 per hour using your taxpayer money, by the way) and raced back to Washington to sign that ‘Save Terri’ legislation.

At whose request? Why, at the request of Rep. Tom Delay. The warnings in the summer of 2001 about an imminent and massive terror attack on the United States could not dislodge George from his repose, but DeLay crooks his little finger and George comes a-runnin’.
(/quote)

Yeah... makes you think!



Comment #110: paul said on 4/6/05 @ 10:43am ET...

Ummm.... sorry about the double post! Don't know how that happened. Please delete one. Thanks. :)



Comment #111: Ken said on 4/6/05 @ 11:28am ET...

Galen is a typical liberal - you don't have any argument, so start talking about Rush Limbaugh and calling those who disagree with you names. Pathetic.

It should be obvious to anyone, but I'll spell it out for poor Galen - The party affiliation or conservative credentials of the nominating president are irrelevant to whether a particular judge is liberal or an activist. George H.W. Bush appointed Souter, who is very liberal/activist, for one example. Eisenhower appointed the very liberal/activist Earl Warren.

But I suspect Galen will choose to continue wallowing in ignorance and hatred. Carry on...



Comment #112: Ken said on 4/6/05 @ 11:31am ET...

All this talk coming from the left these days about "theocracy" in America is pure unadulterated bigotry. Hatred seems to be an integral part of liberalism today.



Comment #113: Leslie said on 4/6/05 @ 1:58pm ET...

Editorial today in the New York Times.

The Judges Made Them Do It



Comment #114: Jo Ann Wingard said on 4/6/05 @ 1:58pm ET...

What can you do about the following:

Senate playing games with soldiers' safety (Joe Scarborough)


The U.S. Senate is playing the most cynical of games.

Reports from Washington this morning tell us that Republican senators are going to attach part of the President's illegal alien amnesty program to an emergency-spending bill.

As a former congressman, I know how this scam works.

You pick the most offensive bill you can find and attach it to a piece of legislation that everyone knows must be passed.

So what have Republican leaders in the U.S. Senate decided to hold hostage?

The safety of U.S. troops overseas.

That's right, sports fans.

U.S. Senators are holding American soldiers and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan hostage because of this Illegal Immigrant Protection bill. And these politicians have done it by tying the Illegal Alien Protection Act with an $80 billion Emergency Funding bill aimed at funding our troops overseas.

Why would they do this?

Well, senators play these sleazy games because it provides them cover when they are back in their home districts explaining to a local yokel why they had to vote for that terrible amnesty bill.

"Those rascals in the Senate," I can almost hear him say to the star-struck constituent, "well, they attached the dad burn amnesty program to a funding bill for our troops. I had to vote for it because I couldn't leave our young boys over there without any support, could I?"

Of course not, the impressed voter mutters back, thinking to themselves that doing such an awful thing would make even Jane Fonda blush.

And our senator will get away with this legislative shell game because Americans rarely figure out who attaches offensive provisions to legislative bills. And when you do you find that it is usually a political heavyweight who will never lose at the polls.

The kicker is that the same senator who shouts from the highest mountaintop in his district how he opposes such legislative trickery then goes around the corridors of Capitol Hill whispering to concerned lobbyists about his brave support of the offending provision.

But this case, the Republican Senate is being too clever by half. Americans will blame them, their party and their president if this horrible provision becomes law.

With ultimate power comes ultimate responsibility.

And in this case, bet your bottom dollar that the American people will hold President Bush's party accountable



Comment #115: Leslie said on 4/6/05 @ 2:02pm ET...

Link didn't go live on the first post. Oh well, I'll try again.
The Judges Made Them Do It

And just in case ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/06/opinion/06wed1.html?



Comment #116: Ken said on 4/6/05 @ 2:49pm ET...

Since Democrats are largely pro-illegal alien and anti-military, what's the problem, from a Democrat's perspective?



Comment #117: alizaryn said on 4/6/05 @ 3:21pm ET...

Distract, change the subject, rearrange and divide. Sorry Ken, not me, not this time.



Comment #118: Ken said on 4/6/05 @ 3:30pm ET...

Sorry alizaryn, I don't understand what you're trying to say. I don't speak babble.



Comment #119: Steve said on 4/6/05 @ 4:32pm ET...

Mr. Conyers thank you for saying what many of us have been thinking, that these recent attacks against the judiciary are a critical threat to our democracy. I only hope that more Democrats will take a public stand on this issue before it's too late.

Also, I'd like to suggest that everyone ignore that Ken guy. It's pretty obvious that he's just trying to start arguements not dialog. The back and forth detracts from a real conversation on this very serious issue. It's a good thing that we don't need to convince the Ken's in America of anything, it's the people in the middle who need to understand just how right wing extremism is hurting America.



Comment #120: Ken said on 4/6/05 @ 5:25pm ET...

Steve thinks it's a threat to democracy to offer a critique of the judicial branch?

And Steve thinks he can have a conversation by only talking to people who agree with him already?

How boneheaded can one person be? Grow up Steve.

It is an unaccountable, activist judiciary that is a threat to democracy. And that is precisely what the Democrats want.



Comment #121: Paul said on 4/6/05 @ 7:34pm ET...

Leslie #115: Thanks again Leslie. :)

Jo Ann Wingard #144 I hadn't read that! Interesting, sadly... And a good question. Thanks.

Steve #119 You are right about ignoring Ken! But, I can't help myself! I almost spilt my coffee laughing at him! LOL

Plastic Ken: Hahahahaha...
Thanks Ken! Really! I needed a laugh with my morning coffee! I love reading you unintelligent, uninspired, illogical and virtually illiterate, completely ironic posts. :) (And no, irony is NOT a kind of metal!)

May I correct that last line for you? You made two typographical errors, an understandably simple error for you. :)

It is an unaccountable, activist Government that is a threat to democracy. And that is precisely what the Republicans want.

So, how's Barbie BTW? Still have a headache? :D So, I'm curious.... how do two plastic puppets do... Nahhh, on second thought, I don't really want to know! :)

PS. I enjoy satire also. :)



Comment #122: Ken said on 4/6/05 @ 8:07pm ET...

Paul is apparently in the 5th grade, judging from that last bit of juvenile bilge.

But what is an "activist government"??? How is a government that acts a "threat to democracy"? You might try to think before you post next time, Paul.

And does the Democrat penchant for a cradle-to-grave welfare state not qualify?

Always remember paul, we're not laughing with you, we're laughing at you.



Comment #123: CRACKPOT said on 4/7/05 @ 2:12pm ET...

I gotta question. Why did we send Wrath (Bush 2), Lust (Clinton) and Greed (Bush 1) to represent the US at the Vatican, while leaving the Nobel Peace Prize (Carter) winner at home?



Comment #124: Ken said on 4/7/05 @ 7:33pm ET...

Because Carter is a complete joke.

Terrorist Yasser Arafat also won a Nobel prize by the way.



Comment #125: Paul said on 4/8/05 @ 8:58am ET...

Ahhh! So now you show your true colors! You are an Israeli propagandist! A true Bush friend. Thanks for clearing that up. :)

Yes, Arafat did receive a Nobel Peace Prize. And he deserved it. A German Jew won the Prize in 1936. :) Don't worry, I don't expect you to understand the significance. :D

The only way any GOP (especially Bush) would get a Nobel Peace Prize nomination, is by invading Norway and taking over the committee! LOL

People who have proven, positive, achievements are generally a joke to the ignorant and illiterate nobodies who have achieved nothing. Keep going, you're on a roll. :)



Comment #126: Ken said on 4/8/05 @ 11:11am ET...

So, Paul shows his true colors - he is a racist, a bigot. And so open about it too! Anyone who opposes the terrorist Yasser Arafat is an "Israeli propagandist". And the terrorist "deserved" a Nobel prize.

I'm sure Congressman Conyers will be very proud to have a nazi like Paul as a supporter.



Comment #127: Paul said on 4/9/05 @ 12:52am ET...

So, You fascist GOPs all claim you are Christians of the highest order. You hate Muslims, but you love the Jews. Even though Jesus himself rebuked the Jews in his Fathers name. How interesting! You *SERIOUSLY* need to brush up on your theology... Your atheism is showing! Hypocrite was the word given to decribe people such as you. You profess Christianity, and yet shun God's laws. How typical.

You show a fine example of the pot calling the kettle black.

Well, enough of this kindergarden level (and style) of debating. I'm too bored now (and even my patience wears thin). Time to debate with someone with an intellect, and on serious subjects. Your handlers will be displeased. You didn't do a very good job of disrupting things here. :)

have a good day. :)

Next...



Comment #128: Ken said on 4/11/05 @ 11:15am ET...

Paul spouts a bunch of nazi-like bigotry, defends the quasi-fascist party (the Democrats are much more akin to fascists than the Republicans have ever been) and then accuses someone else of fascism? That is funny! *LOL*



Comment #129: Minerva said on 4/13/05 @ 1:04am ET...

I think you have that backwards, Ken.

The 14 Defining Characteristics Of Fascism
by Dr. Lawrence Britt

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
4. Supremacy of the Military
5. Rampant Sexism
6. Controlled Mass Media
7. Obsession with National Security
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
9. Corporate Power is Protected
10. Labor Power is Suppressed
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
14. Fraudulent Elections

As of January 2004, the United States fulfills all fourteen points of fascism and all seven warning signs are present. But we're not alone. Israel also fulfills all fourteen points and all seven warning signs as well. Welcome to the new republic, redefined, revised and spun. It is not too late to reverse this in either country, but it will be soon. The first step is realizing it. The second step is getting involved. As the propaganda slogan disguising our current war goes, "Freedom isn't free." But our war for freedom isn't abroad; it's here at home. [quote]

That sounds a lot like the party currently in charge in America today. That would be the Republicans not the Democrats, right? Now *that* is funny!! *LOL*



Comment #130: Ken said on 4/13/05 @ 12:00pm ET...

1. The nationalism of fascism is ethnic nationalism, e.g. Italy. The Democrats support treating people differently under the law based on ethnicity, the Republicans do not.

2. The men and women of Iraq exercised their right to vote on January 30th. The Democrats opposed the liberation of Iraq. If you had your way, Saddam Hussein would still be in power, so you have no basis to preach human rights, you hypocrite.

3. Al Qaeda declared themselves America's enemies. It's nonsense to claim that having enemies makes a country fascist.

4. Having a strong national defense does not make a country fascist either. You're being absurd. You're just engaging in cheap epithets.

5. Talk to the Islamists you don't want to fight about sexism. George W. Bush appointed a black woman as his Secretary of State. You're dealing in fantasy. Millions of women voted in Afghanistan and Iraq because George W. Bush acted.

6. Who exactly controls CBS news, ABC News, NBC News, the NY Times, The Washington Post? Again, you're engaging in fantasy.

7. The primary responsibility of any government is national security. By your paranoid delusions, every country is fascist. Crazy talk.

8. Hitler wanted to eliminate religious people from his society. So do you. Enough said.

9, 10. Pure fantasy.

11. No idea what you're talking about. Perhaps you think it's fascist to criticize 'art' like Piss Christ? Your disdain for free speech is noted.

12. Punishing criminals is fascistic??? Pure kookism.

13. So you're saying Bill and hilalry Clinton are fascists? I won't try to argue the point.

14. Fraudulent elections? Are you referring to Democrats shooting at Republican campaign offices or are you referring to the fraud that the Democrats perpetrated in Washington state?

Listing some vague generalities about things you don't like and then labeling the things you dislike "fascist" is just childish.



Comment #131: Paul said on 4/14/05 @ 6:15am ET...

Hi Minerva,

Hmmm.... We have a Goddess on the blog now! ;-) Nice to see you Athena. :-D

Thanks for your post, but just ignore the moron. You won't get a sane, sensible or intelligent response. It will crawl back to the slime pool it came from eventually. :-)

Hmmm, does one speak ancient or modern Greek or Latin to a mythological Goddess? :-D

Xaire (or in the modern Greek: Herete). Vale. ;-)



Comment #132: Becky said on 4/16/05 @ 11:33pm ET...

#129 from Minerva,
You are right. I've done a little research myself on fascism and noticed the American similarities. It is very unnerving. I'm am very worried about how much more damage can be done in the next 3 1/2 years. We've got to get the voting problems fixed before 2006 or it's over for our country.



Comment #133: Rainbow Sally said on 4/18/05 @ 5:29am ET...

During the Schiavo smokescreen (not that it wasn't important, but was it THIS important?) Pakistand bought a bunch of F-16s from us. In response, and during that same time frame, India then followed suit.. as sort of an "offer you can't refuse" deal, would be my guess.

Then Hugo Chavez, seeing this SAME smoke screen with the additional safety of the American gun running beefed up his gear, most of which is obviously for protecting the 1400 mile, mountainous area, including some F-16s.

The F-16s came from Brazil, not from the US, though. Those jets were sold to Brazil during the Clinton administration, oddly, without the usual third party veto condition.

Oh well.

About Terry Schiavo. I would never have guessed that so many muddy mud slingers could be found in one debate. People who pulled the plug on their own relatives, who recommended farming anencephalics, who passed laws allowing spouses to make these kinds of decisions... these guys with their obvious pandering being taken seriously by the brain dead press???

Suddenly we have a Cult of Lifers who sound like a Culture of Life?

Let me remind the hapless reader that gets this far into my tirade that one man redefined homicide as patriotism instead of murder, and that was done with the unconstitutional acquiescence of Congress.

http://usconstitution.net/const.html

See "declare" and context.

The point here is that our leaders aren't just changing rules, they are changing definitions. It doesn't get much worse than that.

When the truth itself is legislated to be "illegal", latch-up and death of a nation will be our problem. Not just this drop of rain that couldn't fall.

The ocean is yours, Terri.

Now about the two-timing husband who has been slandered quite effectively by the two-timing slanderers.

I never would have thought it necessary to prove one's own innocence.

I'm waiting for the autopsy results. Was it judicial murder? Judicial manslaughter? Or judicial incompetence?

I'd guess, worst case it is incompetence. See "impeach" in the document linked above. That's always been the remedy and it's about goddam time we start using it, starting with the president and... one wonders, John?

Where's our regime change?

No "i" word AND no regime change?

I'm not accusing you of anything, but we gave you what you wanted and you returned a wimp Kerry who just made it harder to prove the republicans (or someone) manipulated our last election.

Please say YES to "i" words if you give a damn about preserving, protecting, and defending that thing.

That thing we all have a great interest in seeing not perish from this earth.

No exaggeration, John.



Comment #134: DEFJAM said on 5/16/05 @ 2:40am ET...

Whats the news on the secret UK memo its been since may 5th since it was written and still no response from the Whitehouse . Also it took a week to show up on CNN with a quick 30sec mention of it and nothing at all in the local media or print . How free is this country anymore with that kind of press coverage , Truly sickening


New Comment
Name:
Password:
E-Mail:
Homepage:
Password is required to post a comment.
If you are not registered, please click here
to register. Please allow 24 to 48 hours for the
registration to be completed.
John Conyers'
ConyersBlog

· Main Index ·
· RSS Feed ·
ConyersBlog RSS 1.0 FEED


Paid For And Authorized By Conyers for Congress
Michael J. Remington, Treasurer
P.O. Box 17204
Alexandria, Virginia 22302
Phone: 313-438-2004
Email: campaign@johnconyers.com
Photographs Copyright Kim M. Simpson All Rights Reserved


Campaignoffice.com