Memos by Bush Official who Opposed Torture were Destroyed

This former Bush Official and counsel for Condoleeza Rice wrote a rebuttal to the Yoo/Bybee/Bradbury Torture Memos - only to have the Bush Administration respond by having his memo tracked down and destroyed.

Just like the interrogation tapes of Abu Zubaydah were (illegally) destroy in violation of a court order, the deeper and deeper we look into this situation the more and more it resembles a Criminal Cover-Up than a debate on detainee policy.

Vyan

In 2007 Glenn Beck Couldn't understand why Americans wouldn't Pray for Bush

From the Glenn Beck Radio program.

Republicans say they are twice as likely to (74%) as Democrats (37%) to pray for (President Bush). How do you not pray for everyone, how do you not pray for your enemies, how do you not pray for guidance to everyone from God, what has happened to our country!

Yeah, Word!

Vyan

AG Holder Still Considering Prosecuting Torture

in a move that just might make all of Obama's attempts to sweep the Bush-Era torture under the rug irrelvant, freshly minted Attorney General Holder appears to still seriously be considering the investigation of Torture and War Crimes via a Special Prosecutor.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

From Isikoff's report in Newsweek.

But the Obama administration is not off the hook. Though administration officials declared that CIA interrogators who followed Justice's legal guidance on torture would not be prosecuted, that does not mean the inquiries are over. Senior Justice Department lawyers and other advisers, who declined to be identified discussing a sensitive subject, say Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. has discussed naming a senior prosecutor or outside counsel to review whether CIA interrogators exceeded legal boundaries--and whether Bush administration officials broke the law by giving the CIA permission to torture in the first place. Some Justice officials are deeply troubled by reports of detainee treatment and believe they may suggest criminal misconduct, these sources say. Even if prosecutions prove too difficult to bring, an outside counsel's report could be made public. For his part, Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is still pushing for a "truth commission." In a democracy, the wheels of justice grind on--and the president, for good reason under the rule of law, does not have the power to stop them.

Yet again the simply truth that the President may run the Country - but the Attorney General runs the Justice Department and for the most part - they are and should be independent of each other.

In fact, this may be one of the best ways to address this issue - rather than having anything to do with partisanship, "payback" or retribution - it may in all truth simply be about "Justice". Contrary to the other diary which posits this as some kind of "game", this may exactly the way this case needs to go forward and leave Obama's own hands clean in this investigation and avoid a partisan bloodbath that would derail his agenda for the next three years.

As is discussed by Isikoff in the case of Jane Harmon, the mixing of politics and prosecutions is a highly volatile combination.

Sen. Leahy has run into a complete and total Stonewall with Senate Republicans and is so-far unwilling to persue a "Truth Commission" as a completely partisan event, meanwhile in the House Conyers has already called for a Special Prosecutor.

Holder taking the reins and assigning an independent investigator to get at the truth, no matter who or what it costs is exactly what we need. The DOJ is independent and should STAY independent of policy decisions made at the White House.

Vyan

Update Obama appears now to be backing AG Holder, a point which makes yesterdays discussion of whether or not Obama was violating the UN Convention against torture by blocking an investigation somewhat moot. What I said then was that it was inappropriate for the President to stop the AG from doing his job and that was exactly what appeared to be happening as Rahm Emmanuel and Robert Gibbs both promised "No Prosecutions".

Today seems to be a new day. With Holder learning toward investigations - NOW it would be wrong (and maybe or maybe not illegal) for the President to attempt to squash this. Maybe this was the "Plan" all along - but then again, maybe he heard the footsteps of history drawing close... hard to tell.

Update 2 From the AP.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama said Tuesday the United States lost "our moral bearings" with gruesome terror-suspect interrogations and left the door open to prosecuting Bush administration officials who vouched for their legality.

At the same time, Obama said the question of whether to bring charges "is going to be more of a decision for the attorney general within the parameters of various laws and I don't want to prejudge that." The president discussed the continuing issue of terrorism-era interrogation tactics with reporters as he finished an Oval Office meeting with visiting King Abdullah of Jordan.

Video

Update 3 Watching the Gibb Press conference, there's clearly quite a bit of confusion as to what was said by Rahm yesterday and what the President has said today. I think some of that is cleared up by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse on Rachel.



The OPR review of the OLC memos is still ongoing and not complete. There had been some noise made that the final report would recommend disbarment of Yoo, Bybee and Bradbury.

The real question in my mind, isn't really the memos themselves but Why they were written and whether the purpose and content was specifically manipulated by people in the White House (Gonzales, Addington) to Cover-Up a Crime already in progress.

Also Cheney is loudly claiming that it was inappropriate that Obama released the OLC memos (Never mind the Court Order that requested them), while not releasing other memos that showed the "Good information" we received from them. Except that the CIA says Cheney claim that he requested the Proof of Effectiveness Memos was never received.

Let me just say again, that those Memos of post-torture claims are useless unless the information was Confirmed as Credible by the FBI, which so far they haven't been. And even if it were - it all would still be a War Crime.

Vyan

UN to Obama: Failure to Prosecute Torture is Illegal

Rahm Emmanuel on This Week: "This is not a time for Retribution or Anger"



Via Thinkprogress

The UN Special Rapporteur stated in a recent interview with Australia's Der Standard

STANDARD: CIA torturers are according to U.S. President Obama not to be prosecuted. Is that decision supportable?

NOWAK: Absolutely not. The United States has, like all other Contracting Parties to the UN Convention Against Torture, committed itself to investigate instances of torture and to prosecute all cases in which credible evidence of torture is found.

Word!

Despite what Rahm or Obama says, this is not about "Retribution or Anger" it's simply about Justice and the Law.

STANDARD: In other words, by making this announcement, Obama has violated international law?

NOWAK: Correct. It is a violation of binding international treaty law in this case, because this is an international law convention — and it provides unequivocally that states are not merely obligated to make torture a crime, but also to prosecute any incidents of which credible evidence can be found.

The UN Convention Against Torture, which was signed by Ronald Reagan and ratified by a Republican Congress in 1995 says this.

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

No exceptions, in plain English means - NO EXCEPTIONS.

This is the Law, ignorance of the Law - is NO EXCUSE!

This is something that someone really needs to tell GOP Torture shills like Frank Gaffney


Despite what Frank says the fact is that the Geneva Conventions and the UN Convention Against Tortue aren't just some irrelevant "International Law" that has nopower within the sovereign United States. These are Treaties that WE SIGNED and Ratified and as such have the full force and binding aspect of our own Constitution as noted under Hamdan v Rumsfeld (pdf).

Article 3 of the Geneva Convention (III)Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,Aug. 12,1949, [1955 ] 6 U..S.T.3316,3318,T.I.A.S.No.3364. The provision is part of a treaty the United States has ratified and thus accepted as binding law.See id.,at 3316. By Act of Congress, moreover, violations of Common Article 3 are considered “war crimes,” punishable as federal offenses,when committed by or against United States nationals and military personnel. See 18 U.S.C.§2441. There should be no doubt,then,that Common Article 3 is part of the law of war as that term is used in §821.

These treaties are executed under U.S. law as 18 USC 2340 (Torture) and 18 USC 2441 (War Crimes).

Nothing in these statutes says the U.S. should only prosecute "when it's politically convenient" - in fact, I suspect Obama's open refusal to persue these charges may have left himself and A.G. Holder vulnerable to legal action by those who have been tortured under U.S. policy or their surviving families.

Suites like those already in progress against Donald Rumsfeld.

Oct. 27, 2004 – Four men, who were formerly detained at the US detention center in Guantanamo Bay, filed a lawsuit today against numerous pentagon officials, including Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, for allegedly authorizing torture and other human rights violations during their detention.

The plaintiffs, Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Rhuhel Ahmed and Jamal Al-Harith -- all British citizens -- claim they were arbitrarily detained and suffered abuse and mistreatment while in US custody. They are each seeking $10 million in damages from those responsible in their individual capacities. This is the first case of its kind.
.

Chances are, it won't be the last.

There is also a compelling argument to made that as signatories to these treaties we are Obligated to oblige by Universal Jurisdiction (a concept that has already been employed by These states include: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Mexico, Netherlands, Senegal, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.)

"All states parties to the Convention against Torture and the Inter-American Convention are obliged whenever a person suspected of torture is found in their territory to submit the case to their prosecuting authorities for the purposes of prosecution, or to extradite that person. In addition, it is now widely recognized that states, even those which are not states parties to these treaties, may exercise universal jurisdiction over torture under customary international law."[10]

So, yes, Frank - Spain can prosecute Americans for Torture, even if Obama doesn't.

Oddly enough one of the few people whose got this issue right - except for his desire to keep the truth hidden so that America won't be "embarrassed" - is John McCain.



The arguement that tools such as Waterboarding are "neccesary and effective" is done and over - something isn't effective when you have to do it 183 times to get results. The CIA says that got "good information", the FBI (who had to go out and verify that info says they didn't - I trust the FBI on this one, since the same CIA said Saddam had mobile WMD labs! (A false allegation that also came about via Torture)

We have to come to realize that prosecuting criminals, especially War Criminals, is not "vindictive" - it's our responsibility as a civilized nation - if we fail at that, we fail as a society and force the hand of others to do what needs to be done.

Vyan

Update: There is some dispute as to whether or not the UN Conventions would override Prosecutorial Descretion since they were not Self-Executing and Congress choose to ignore the automatic provisions. I think that's a fair debate to have. Would the courts really reject a Civil Suit like the one I suggest (considering the fact they have already accept several including Hamdan, Hamdi and Boumedine already?) if it's sole purpose was primarily to argue that the failure to investigate and prosecute would be a clear violation of treaty obligations or would this have to be addressed in a Foreign Court (like Spain) or International Tribunal such as the Hague?

One other point I want to make is that Obama's argument against prosecution doesn't really follow the U.S. or the DOJ's own guidelines. He absolutely does have "credible evidence" that War Crimes took place, most of the arguments put forth in the Bybee/Yoo memos have been roundly defeated by the SCOTUS - and there are various memos, particularly those from then White House Counsel Gonzales that indicates willful knowledge that these policies may have been in violation of 18 USC 2441, and thereofore subsequent arguements were made to subvert the law such as President Bush's baseless claims that Geneva didn't apply to Al Qeada, when it clearly did and still does.
Obama's choosing not to prosecute for political reasons, not criminal ones.

Obama's choosing not to prosecute for political reasons, not criminal ones.

Obama speaking today at CIA!


Not a very inspiring speech IMO. It doesn't matter whether our Enemies are constrained by the "Rule of Law" or not - WE ARE! It might be true that the AG has prosecutorial descretion not to persue these charges based on a reasonable legal analysis, but does the President have the ability to block an thorough investigation for Politics?

Columbine Shooting : Ten Years Later

The story of one survivor on the Columbine High School shooting Ten Years Ago, Today.

Rebuilding the Bridge Across the Ideological Divide

A few days ago I wrote an open letter to the Tea Partiers in an attempt to - just for a moment - speak to them seriously, without derision, snark or insult, simply because it seemed to me we were losing our ability to have rational discussions of public policy across the ideological chasm.

I'll admit I had low expectations, and most initial comments were similarly pessemistic - but then something (almost) amazing happened. A Conversation Started Up.

So today I'd like to keep that meager little conversation going a bit longer.

Why?

I think our country needs it. I think we need it. I don't think we can afford to continue to angrily throw word bombs at each other, demonize each other, and not even make an attempt to understand where each other is coming from. We may not agree, in fact I'm sure we won't, but at least having an ACCURATE view of each others point of view might help stem the tide of fear and vitriol that seems to be increasing to dangerous levels.

It might be fun to toss "Wingnut" and "Moonbat" back and forth across at each - sure, it's cathartic - but it's not always productive. We need to change, because if we don't, it won't just be angry words we're throwing at each other.

Exhibit A: From Countdown Last Week featuring Janeane Garafalo (I know this will be tough and difficult for Tea Partiers to watch and hear, but please bare with me and try and listen to it, what occurred here is Important and has to be addressed)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

In this segment I think Janeane seriously over-steps and over-states her case against the Partiers. And I'm not the only one who feels that way coming from the Center/Left side of the aisle.

On Dailkos you had: Keith and Janeane Garofalo - Becoming what you hate...

Tonight I got home late from work and flipped to Countdown with Keith Olbermann. What I saw was disappointing, to say the least.

It was more tea bagging double entendres and cheap jokes. Now I'm with everyone in else in having a good time with these protests, but there is a limit, and I think we're approaching it. At the end of the day, however laughable the claims of these protesters may be, they are still Americans practicing a great American tradition.

But I can look passed the jokes and the mockery. What I couldn't stand was what came after - Janeane Garofalo.

Chatting in a "I know I'm being controversial and I think that's awesome" kind-of tone she said that everyone protesting yesterday were strictly racists. She claimed they were all idiots. And she went on to claim that they had a mental disorder.

The point made in this diary was that Janeane statements were identical to those we've seen all-too-often coming from prominent conservatives.

Namely Ann Coulter.

And Michael Savage.

This kind of argument has been going on so long, used by the likes of Limbaugh, that the idea of Liberalism as a Disease or Disorder has even been picked up by actual, licensed psychiatrists.

"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."

Let's also recall that Charles Krauthhammer has infamously called it "Bush Derangement Syndrome".

Clearly the "Crazy Train" accusations run down both sides of the tracks as another Dkos poster wrote an Open Letter to Olbermann to Complain about Garafalo.

Dear Mr. Olbermann,

I'm writing to complain about the appearance by Janeane Garofalo on your program Countdown on April 16, 2009. I write not as a conservative or tea tax protester. I am a liberal and supporter of Barack Obama. I am also a fan of your show and watch it online at msnbc.com on a near daily basis. The reason I am a fan of your show is because, while it is opinion driven, you make great arguments in your Special Comment section. It was your passionate defense of gay marriage, sent to me by a friend via StumbleUpon, that got me into watching your show.

My complaint with Ms. Garofalo's appearance is that her argument against the Teabaggers was way below the standards I believe your show to have. You often critique Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh for making irrational, illogical, and patently false accusations against groups or individuals that oppose their point of view. Ms. Garofalo's statements regarding the teabaggers as uniformily racist and driven by their "limbic system" rather than their frontal lobe smack of the same ignorance that you have opposed in right wing media. Ms. Garafolo fails the most basic rules of rhetoric, logic and debate. She never back up claims of racism, either with video of protesters saying or implying racist ideas. Despite her love for saying "limbic system", she cites no credentials for her to argue psychology. While it's certainly more politically correct to use "limbic system" than using the word 'retarded’, the meaning and use in her argument is the same. Ms. Garofalo cited no studies to confirm whether those protesters were more 'limbic" than "frontal lobe" in their thinking. Her analysis has as much basis as Bill Frist's analysis of Teri Shiavo as being aware based on a few seconds of video. Frist, as a medical doctor, at least had some credentials to make an assessment.

I will openly admit it that I've made arguments similar to both Garafalo's and Kruathhammer's in the past, when I wrote that Conservatism is a Sociapathic Disease. In that discussion I stated:

It's been my feeling that the modern day conservative cult that thrives in America is fueled by a low-grade form of anti-social pathology and compulsive-addictive disorder. They're like Hate-Junkies. And the number one thing they hate are Liberals.

My point here is really just to say that we all need to take a step back.

Tea Partiers argue that their concerns aren't partisan, they're angry at both parties equally, and without getting into the inconsistencies around their actions contrasted to this sentiment I want to state that at the core they are correct. But also in a way, so are Garafalo and Coulter and Savage - up to a point.

The most dangerous problems facing this nation aren't particularly political, they aren't because too much liberalism or too much conservatism, it's because of too much denial and self-delusion.

Holding a particular set of beliefs isn't where we're failing, it's when we choose to Cling (Yes, I said it) CLING DESPERATELY to those previously held beliefs rather than honestly assess the facts in front of us accurately.

All of these people are seeing the same problem, the inability of many people to function rationally and use fact and reason to reach a conclusion because doing so CONFLICTS with their deep seated beliefs. In short, what we think we know is preventing us from learning anything new.

We are learning through neurological scientific study how experiences are turned into memories in the hippocampus, and then later re-imprinted on the frontal lobe. The transfer of this information from one portion of the brain to another is most likely to speed retrieval during critical decision making and having the data already stored in the frontal lobe facilitates that.

The problem arises when our critical minds attempts to keep things "Neat and Tidy". We start to eliminate and reject thoughts or ideas which don't neatly fit into our existing thought-system. Rather than analyze the conflict and come to a resolution, we just throw it out and consider it "bad data".

This natural human tendency, which is a function of our neurology and physiology not a Mental Disability has been long called the Paradigm Paralysis.

In the late 1940s a man walked into a laboratory of a major photographic manufacturer in America to demonstrate a new photographic process. But he didn't bring along a camera or film. He brought along a red box with a shiny steel plate, a charging device, a light bulb and a container of black powder. The picture he created was faint but discernible.

"But where's the film?" they asked. "Where's the developer? Where's the darkroom? Why, that's not really photography!" And so the company passed up an opportunity to acquire the process for electrostatic photography, or xerography...a process that has grown into a multi-billion dollar industry.

Why did they pass up such a great opportunity? Because the people who saw the process were suffering from PARADIGM PARALYSIS.

What is paradigm paralysis? Or more basically, what is a paradigm?

As you probably know, a paradigm is a model or a pattern. It's a shared set of assumptions that have to do with how we perceive the world. Paradigms are very helpful because they allow us to develop expectations about what will probably occur based on these assumptions. But when data falls outside our paradigm, we find it hard to see and accept. This is called the PARADIGM EFFECT. And when the paradigm effect is so strong that we are prevented from actually seeing what is under our very noses,
we are said to be suffering from paradigm paralysis.

Perfectly smart people can and will say completely ridiculous, easily disprovable- things largely because of this paralysis.

And that's exactly what we have going on in our country today - A Paralysis.

This becomes even more intense when it goes beyond an individual opinion, and becomes a tribalistic doctrine of a larger group. We are all familiar with the loss of inhibition against unsociable behaviors that a group dynamic can create. What might seem irrational or unreasonable action to take as an individual, can become far easier and far more consequential when done as a group. We're all familiar with this in terms of Sports Team Rivalries, but it affects all types of rival groups, particularly political factions.

What I'm talking about here is the Mob Mentality.

The term “mob mentality” is used to refer to unique behavioral characteristics which emerge when people are in large groups. It is sometimes used disparagingly, as the term “mob” typically conjures up an image of a disorganized, aggressive, panicked group of people. Social psychologists who study group behavior tend to prefer terms like “herd behavior” or “crowd hysteria.” The study of mob mentality is quite fascinating, and it is used to analyze situations which range from evacuations gone awry to the moment when demonstrations turn violent.

It's when things get this level, where the Partisan Paradigm is re-enforced in order to maintain and enhance a social, political, economic or cultural power-base that some real and permanent damage can be done. This is where our society stops productively functioning, instead we spend our time any energy simply trying to "BEAT THE OTHER GUYS" rather than doing what's right and best for all of us.

From opposite sides of this political spectrum the other side just looks *CRAZY*, insane, fanatical - dangerous! While the Left is making what seems to them like perfectly cogent logical arguments to improve our country and improve the world, the Right doesn't hear them. Then the Right rails in frustration about the "Crazy Liberals" who can't seem to understand... and on and on it goes.

And the worse and worse it gets.

THIS is what the Tea Parties represent to me. A near complete collapse of our ability to work across the political chasm and work together for the greater good. Both sides have some valid points and valid arguments, but all of that is getting lost in all the Cheap Shots, the Sturm and Drang. It's all heat, no light, all carrier, no signal.

As I've stated everyone once in awhile, I'm a centrist - I don't cling to either left or right ideology - and have long felt they both had their benefits as well as their dangers. Government isn't hopelessly evil and flawed, and neither is Industry. Either can be dangerous and either can be beneficial. When we're too busy being locked into a rigid view, we can't get to the more important issue of identifying where either of these entities has truly gone wrong and what we really need to do to clean up the mess - we're too busy hurling "SOCIALISM", "FASCISM", "RACISM" accusations at each other.

We need to calm the hell down, and not look at a fact based on who said it - but whether the fact in and of itself IS VALID OR NOT. If it is, we have to embrace the Paradigm Shift, and incorporate that truth into our belief system, rather than reject it out of hand - or construct some elaborate dodge to explain it away.

The reason this is important is because if we only speak and communicate with those who Already Agree with Us, those only within our own political/social "tribe", the likelihood of making those kind of breakthroughs is limited. The likelihood of discovered NEW truths is stunted.

None of us knows everything, and if we aren't willing to constantly challenge and test our own beliefs, to UPGRADE our knowledge and facts, we fall into stagnation, then irrelevance, then frustration, then rage and eventually - violence.

It can be challenging, even annoying to have your every thought or word disputed. It gets worse when derision and ridicule is thrown on top of it. I don't know that this point itself won't be rejected out of hand, but it's better to at least make the attempt than walk away from the conversation (as so many of us have) in disgust and anger - looking for "revenge" and way to hurt each other in more and more cruel and ways.

We need to do better than this. We need to start building bridges and stop tearing them all down - Really we do - or else what Tim McVeigh attempted to start on this very day, April 19th, so many years ago and what Rick Perry and Tom Delay have hinted at this very week, Secession, a full-on Red-State/Blue-State Separation and a New American Civil War won't just be a memory.

It just might become our reality in the very near future, and I think - I hope - that none of us truly wants that.

Vyan

Obama release Torture Memos, uses "Nuremberg" defense

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

I gotta say David just hits it out of the park. I've written about this time and time again, there is no question - Waterboarding is Torture, Torture is a War Crime, War Crimes are punishable by upto 5 years in prison and/or capital punishment if the subject dies --- at least 20 detainees have been killed as a result of techniques exactly like those described in these memos, mostly by CIA subcontrators working for the company CACI.

More from Iraq Interrogator Matthew Alexander.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

This isn't partisan. It isn't about "Pay-back". It's about Justice, and so far - even though he has allowed us to see and understand what this country became under Bush, Obama is not listening to the clarion call of Justice. He is not enforcing the law.

That has to change.

Also based on my last post, I'm welcoming comment by those who disagree without Snark, or rudeness. America needs to seriously talk about and understand this, because frankly many of us on the center and left feel that what Obama has done by essentially grant retroactive immunity to the culprits and called forth the Nuremberg "I was following orders" defense.

It's despicable.

Vyan

A Honest,Sincere Letter to the Tea Partiers from a Damn, Dirty Democrat

Crossposted on Dailykos

I'm going to try something unusual today, I'm writing a serious and sincere letter to the Tea Partiers.

Yeah, yeah, I know - it's unlikely that any of them will be willing to listen, will give a RIP what I - a damn, dirty DEMOCRAT with centrist/progressive leanings - might have to say, but I think it's important to drop the snark, drop the cheap double-entendres for a moment and attempt a real conversation.

How about some basic ground rules, I won't call you guys "Tea-baggers" or "Nut-Balls" (anymore), if you drop the "Socialist/Fascist" stuff, ok? Can we agree to that?

Fine.

Let's start with the fact that, whether you realize it or not, most of us from the center to the left actually Agree that Government Spending has been out of control for quite some time. WE'VE BEEN SAYING SO for at least 7 years, some of us - like myslef - for much longer.

But even though we all essentially agree on that point - there are reasons why you guys aren't being taken seriously. Valid reasons. You need to come to grips with those, and not just whine about "Liberal Bias" but really get serious in order to be taken seriously. Right now, you're coming off like the people who say "9-11 Was An Inside Job" or that "Elvis has been only playing Possum" and "Area 51 has Alien Bodies Stashed in it".

I'm not saying that to bust your balls - it's just not that credible.

But your underlying premise, that we need to get government spending under control ISN'T WRONG, it's right - unfortunately it's been misdirected and misguided.

For example Tea Partiers have railed against the Stimulus Bill, when most of that bill - was Tax Cuts for individuals and small business.

You Guys were Protesting Taxes, Immediately after your Taxes Were Cut.

That's not logical.

The people that cut your taxes, were not Republicans. Every republican voted against the Stimulus bill. Now, I would not say that bill was perfect, it had some flaws --but it did some things correctly and we should be happy about that. YOU SHOULD BE HAPPY, but instead you spit on the bill?

Again, how is everyone else to take that?

So, let's at least come to a basic agreement that the problem here is bi-partisan - ok? Democrats have messed up. Republicans have messed up. See - that wasn't hard was it? What the rest us are wondering is - what's your solution?

"Stop government spending."

Ok, which part? Which part of the armed forces, police, fire-departments, teachers, road-workers and hospitals are you going to lay-off? Who else are you going to put out on the street?

See, this issue didn't start yesterday, it's one that been with of for quite some time. I myself got on this political merry-go-round with the Gingrich Congress of '94, and watched pretty closely through that entire period, including both government shutdowns, the mandate for a "date-certain" balanced budget and the eventual surplus that was created largely by President Clinton's efforts, then destroyed by Bush.

Exactly as was pointed out by this Democrat at the Pensacola Tea Party

(Crowd applauds as he takes the microphone)
All right. Thank you very much.

I want to start also by honoring the service of our veterans, our current servicemembers, our Gold Star parents, thank you so much for what all you've done for this country. (Crowd cheers)

I also want to say, a little history lesson here, back in 2000, there was a budget surplus in the country. (Man in crowd: Yeah!) And during the next eight years, (Man in crowd: What happened?) it was destroyed by the profligate spending of the Bush administration. (Crowd reacts)

And so here we are today, here we are today in a situation ... let me ask you this: Cheer if you make less than 250,000 dollars a year. Just cheer. (Crowd cheers) Your taxes are going to be cut under the current budget. Congratulations!

I was laid off in September because my employer had to make budget cuts. That was before the election, okay? So let's remember, that if you're going to argue about more taxes and less spending, to place the blame where the blame belongs, and that's squarely in the hands of the Republican Congress until 2006 (Crowd starts to react) and the Bush administration. (Crowd boos)

Why was this so difficult to simply agree with? I'm not saying that Democrats don't share in the blame, clearly - THEY DO - but this guy wasn't wrong.

Again, I constant read claims by Tea Partiers that "This isn't Partisan", but when someone points out specific things that Republicans did to put us where we are - you ARGUE about it.

Many partier comments have been defensively claiming "this isn't about Democrats" immediately followed by a long list of Democrats to blame like Barney Frank (with dosses of "Fag" thrown in) and Maxine Waters ("Bitch"). What's up with that?

You complain about being called "Racist" when you've got pictures of the President with Buckteeth and Giant- "EarMarx". You do that stuff and you lose you're right to complain about Janeane Garafalo and some bad fellatio jokes. I mean really, think about it.

Many Democrats deserve some criticism, that we can agree on, particularly those who voted along with Bush Deficit Busting Cuts, and those who back in 1998 voted to repeal Glass-Steagal the act that had created a a firewall between regular banks and investment banks. Without that firewall people were able to take you're mortgage and play with it on the stock market - it gave an incentive to get creative and crazy with financing and we don't need newer, flashier ways to flush our money down the toilet, we really don't. President Clinton deserves blame here also, since he signed this bill into law.

Only Byron Dorgan saw the writing on the wall.

I want to sound a warning call today about this legislation. I think this legislation is just fundamentally terrible. I hear all these words about the industry remaking itself--banks, security firms and insurance companies, and that we'd better catch up and put a fence around where they are or at least build a pasture in the vicinity of where they are grazing. What a terrible idea.

What is it that sparks this need to modernize our financial system? And what does modernization mean? This chart shows bank mergers in 1998, in just 1 year, last year, the top 10 bank mergers. We have discovered all these corporations have fallen in love and decided to get married. Citicorp, with an insurance company--that is a big one--$698 billion in combined assets; NationsBank--BankAmerica, $570 million; and the list goes on. This is a massive concentration through mergers.

Is it good for the consumers? I don't think so. Better service, lower prices, lower fees? I don't think so. Bigger profits? You bet.

....

I am not anti-bank, anti-security or anti-insurance. All of them play a constructive role and important role in this country. But this country will be better served with aggressive antitrust enforcement, with, in my judgment, fewer mergers, with fewer companies moving in to the ``too big to fail'' category of the Federal Reserve Board, with less concentration.

This country will be better served if we have tighter controls, not firewalls that allow these companies to come together and do inherently risky things adjacent to banking enterprises, but to decide the lessons of the 1930s are indelible transcendental lessons we ought to learn and ought to remember.

Byron is a Democrat, but I'm not gloating. 38 Democrats in the Senate voted for this bill. They messed up, not just Phil Gramm - all of them.

Even without the Community Reinvestment Act, monetizing mortgages would have been a problem. Even without ACORN, even without rampant immigration. Glass-Steagal was put in place to prevent a repeat of the Original Great Depression. Pulling it out almost gave us a second one - and only 8 Senators voted against it.

I've read a number of discussions about the Pensacola video beyond where it was originally posted (on Dailykos) and I've seriously seen people argue that There Was No Surplus.

This is what most of us outside of Fox News World call - "CRAZY TALK!"

Ok, I'm not a CPA or a government accountant, but I did make an attempt at finding out the numbers for myself. This is what I found from Treasury Dept.

Dec 1997 5,502,388
Dec 1998 5,614,217
Dec 1999 5,776,091
Dec 2000 5,662,216
Dec 2001 5,871,413

See that drop in 2000? That's what happens when you have - say it with me now - A SURPLUS of government funds. I will admit that it wasn't that much, but it was definately there, and the primary point that Pensacola man was trying to make was that the downward trend was initially reversed by Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.

Here's another chart which shows both the ratio between growth of wealth for the largest earners in America and the top tax rate (which during the 50's was 93%).



Barack Obama has simply preposed letting the Bush cuts expire - which they will in 2010 - and going back to the rates that Clinton had. That's a 3% change. THREE PERCENT. In response he's been called a "Fascist" and a "Socialist".

I know it's not fun to be called "Crazy" or a "Racists" but responding with "Socialist" doesn't help - particularly when you've got a Barack Obama The Nazi poster in your hand.

Here's another controversial Video - one from Chicago with a CNN reporter, the first part of which was broadcast on air, the second part where the reporter is confronted by a "NormaL" Tea Party protester was not.



The first guy in this video (and there is another sequence from before this one with the Barack-Nazi Guy I just mentioned) is not answering her question about his sign stating that his child si already in debt at two-years-old.

This is a point I've made myself, in fact - for years I've called it The Birth Tax - so, yet again, we're in agreement on the core point, but the problem begins once he opens his mouth and starts to rail indirectly about Obama by misquoting Lincoln.

Man: Lincoln believed that people had the right to share in the fruits of their own labor and that government should not take it

So basically he's saying tha Lincoln was against taxation? Uh....no.

Lincoln wasn't talking about Taxes, he was talking about Slavery!

Indeed, work was as fundamental a value as freedom, argued Mr. Lincoln. In 1854, Mr. Lincoln wrote: "The ant, who has toiled and dragged a crumb to his nest, will furiously defend the fruit of his labor, against whatever robber assails him. So plain, that the most dumb and stupid slave that ever toiled for a master, does constantly know that he is wronged. So plain that no one, high or low, ever does mistake it, except in a plainly selfish way; for although volume upon volume is written to prove slavery a very good thing, we never hear of the man who wishes to take the good of it, by being a slave himself."9

"I believe each individual is naturally entitled to do as he pleases with himself and the fruits of his labor, so far as it in no wise interferes with any other man's rights,"

He was talking about being PAID for you work, the fruits of your labor. This is at least partially why the reporter blows him off - cuz yet again - he's spouting CRAZY TALK.

No, sorry it's not just a "matter of opinion", and he's not entitled to "his view", not when he's just making SHIT UP! And it wasn't even neccesary because he was already correct about the Birth Tax to start with.

Every time you guys do this stuff, the rest of us tune you out!

Now, following Mr. Lincoln-Guy comes the real discussion - which is really just a complaint about the bias of CNN going out of their way to ignore the legitimate arguments being brought forth in order to just highlight the "crazy people". Here's the problem with that - the Crazies are always going to stand out, that's what they DO. It's like asking the News to ignore the guy on fire and instead pay attention to the girl sitting in the corner with a book. THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

The reporter says the crowd is "Anti-CNN", to which the people in the crowd respond that CNN is "Anti-Them".

Here are some of the comments to this video from the Not-so-Anti-CNN people.

Cammie2035 (1 hour ago)
CNN = socialist, anti-free thinking SCUM

freeserb (1 hour ago)
CNN is dead last in ratings.

The Tea Party movement is universal.
How many laid off teachers and govt workers will join the Tea Party movement?

It's no longer Left/Right, Dem/Rep, it's more like working people who've been crushed vs. the arrogant state employees who are racist scum.
CNN is a branch of the state.

Anybody who says "tea-bagger" is a vile, disgusting perverted pedophile.

danspeaks (1 day ago)
anti-CNN, way to be a victim lady... i was there and hardly anyone paid attention to them or cared... anti govt... more like pro-freedom

TV media is crap

Anyone see the irony here?

Look, I don't watch CNN and frankly can't stand it - but this isn't helpful.

And is really saying...

The Federal Reserve Runs this Nation... We do have not representation...they're getting all our money, they all need to be thrown out.

...all that much better? You DO have representation. You may not like your respresentative, but you have one, actually THREE of them. All the Republicans voted against the Stimulus - AND LOST. You just plain lost, that's all.

What you need to do, is learn how to WIN again - and what I'm saying to you, in all seriousness, is that a temper tantrum is not a winning strategy. You need convincing rational arguements, not conspiracy theories about the Federal Reserve, or ACORN, or Obama-the-Socialist.

Really you don't. Look we just won two sets of elections 2006/2008 in a row - we kind of know what we're saying. Places like Dailykos DON'T ALLOW CONSPIRACY THEORISTS, they really don't - and there's good reason for that.

Take a hint.

Here's one last example, via a discussion of the impact of the Tea Parties on C-Span which was posted oby Michelle Malkin.



Malkin's Comments

Watch this. Liberal toady James Wolcott argues that since he didn’t see big Tea Party crowds on his favorite left-wing tv stations and didn’t read front-page stories about the protests in his favorite left-wing newspapers, they weren’t newsworthy and no one really turned out except at the ones Fox News covered. C-SPAN host Susan Swain then displays front page after front page of local news coverage showing thousands of Tea Party participants:

“Does that change your view?”

Wolcott: Er, no.

Again, let's talk common sense. Wolcott is saying that the Tea Party crowd simply wasn't all that impressive - and Malkin is putting words in his mouth making assumptions about the papers he reads in New york. Does she know for a fact that one of those papers isn't the New York Post or the Wall Street Journal? No. Did either of these papers have a front page picture of 100,000 TeaParty protestores? No, they didn't becaue at BEST the entire nation wide number of Tea partier's was about 240,000 - but look at this picture, this is from the 2006 immigration protests in Los Angeles, which -in that one city alone - included 500,000 people.

Crowds like these are what completely derailed both the plans of Tom Tancredo to aggresively shut down the border and the plans of President Bush for a more "comprehensive" approach to immigration. THIS was impressive, you guys were not.

I know it's a natural tendency, I can't say I haven't done it myself, but my point is that viciously Insulting people - that at the core actually agree with your point on deficit reduction - is not how you go from 200,000 to 500,000 to 1 Million to winning elections. Are you starting to feel me here?

Now Obama has promised to reduce the deficit by 50% by the end of his first term. According to OMB projections, he just might do that. CBO - which uses different assumptions says that the defecits will continue and increase for decades?

Also note that a key driver of the new CBO deficit numbers after 2014 are estimates about long-term economic growth—where CBO is somewhat more pessimistic than the consensus. For example, CBO projects long-term real economic growth that declines to 2.2 percent per year. Blue Chip pegs long-term real growth at 2.6 percent per year and the Federal Reserve forecasts long-term real growth of between 2.5 and 2.7 percent—the same as the Administration, which is projecting real long-term growth of 2.6 percent. These differences may not seem big, but over time they accumulate

Whose Right?

It's hard to say, but from the experience we had during the Clinton years in the 90's, Clinton relied on OMB and the Gingrich Congress relied on CBO. Who was right then?

I think you see my point.

Since Obama's been President this is what has happened to the Dow Jones.


We've gained back everything we lost prior to January 20th, and are continuing to gain ground. Companies like Citigroup are starting to show a profit, and since we are now share-holders in these companies - WE ARE GOING TO SHOW A PROFIT.

So let me say it again - CALM DOWN! Now is not the time to panic.

A lot of us understand your frustration, really we do - we've been there, but right now is when things are finally starting to get a little better, not worse.

What you guys really don't want to do, is turn into what Evangelical Frank Scheaffer describes - the crazy guy in the corner annoying everyone.



Consider this a wake-up call. This is your future, for many of you - it's already the present. I'm not saying this to put you down, it's a chance to recognize where you're going and change direction. If you really do care about your country, and not just your own ass, then calm down - take a breath - and get involved in a real, honest and open discussion of these issues.

The time is now, but it's you choice.

Vyan