|
|
||
|
Navigation User login Who's online There are currently 4 users and 31 guests online.
Online users
Support OlyBlog OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation: OlyBlog is powered by:
Who's new
 |
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 7:16pm.
 Yesterday, Tuesday the fifth of February, was the Washington for Impeachment Lobby Day. Fifteen or twenty citizens gathered at the Capitol Campus and spent a good portion of the day lobbying and talking to legislators and legislative aids about the importance of impeachment.
It started raining as soon as I left my house. It was windy. It was cold. I almost turned around and returned home. By the time I got to the Capitol Campus, I was considerably wet (though definitely not soaking, which was good.) I went into the cafeteria where I found my fellow impeachment advocates.  We split up into different groups and proceeded to the offices of the various legislators who have the power to make or break this effort in the Washington State legislature to call for impeachment investigations in the US Congress. There are two bills, sister bills, one each in the State Senate and House. In the House, HJM 4027 was co-sponsored by Representatives Chase, Hasegawa, Moeller and Dickerson. It is currently in the House State Government and Tribal Affairs Committee. Representative Sam Hunt chairs that committee. He is not interested in bringing the memorial to a vote. Word has it that Senator Patty Murray's office has been in contact with Representative Hunt and has lobbied to stifle the state level impeachment initiative. Apparently, Senator Murray has also sent word to the office of Representative Frank Chopp, who has also been influenced by the US Senator's position on impeachment.
In the Senate, SJM 8016 was passed out of its committee (Government Operations and Elections) of origin in the first week of the legislative session. It was co-sponsored by Senators Oemig, Regala, Kohl-Welles, Kline, Spanel, Fairley, Kauffman, Fraser, and Prentice. This bill is waiting to be "pulled" in the Senate Rules Committee. When a bill is "pulled," it means that it will be brought to the floor for reading before the full Senate.  Okay, so if none of this makes sense to you, and you don't know what is going on with impeachment as it relates to members of the Bush Administration, or the current environment in the US Congress, there is a very good summary article by former Representative (and House Judiciary Committee member during the Nixon impeachment proceedings) Elizabeth Holtzman. Here's an excerpt:
Judiciary Committee should move to impeach Bush and Cheney.  Reactions from legislators, and their aids, were mixed. Some legislators were very supportive; they encouraged me and were agreeable. Most legislators (or their assistants) were polite and listened carefully (or seemed to) to my messages. Some of the legislators (or their assistants) however, were discourteous - even to the point of rudeness. For example, Representative Mark Miloscia, who sits on the House State Government and Tribal Affairs committee, was gracious enough to talk with me and my lobbying partner, Gail Johnson. However, once we entered his office, it was apparent that he was in a rush and seemed to be agitated as he organized papers on his desks. He apologized for not giving us his undivided attention. And it wouldn't have bothered me, except that he repeatedly cut us off and interrupted us in our conversation. He explained why he was personally opposed to impeachment. But he wouldn't listen to our rebuttals, or to the basic reasoning about why it is important that he lend his support and solidarity to a bi-partisan push for impeachment (in part simply because it is the right thing, and the necessary thing, to do). Representative Miloscia doesn't support HJM 4027 for two main reasons (as I understood them): 1) the memorial doesn't have the necessary support to pass (hm...maybe partly because of people like him?), and 2) he is concerned about the political viability and that it might bring harm to his re-electability, or to the electability of Democrats in general. Rep. Miloscia was worried that impeachment proceedings would have a cooling effect on the Democratic party.
Maybe he is right. In an article by Robert Parry, I noticed this passage: On Dec. 20, 2007, Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, told Amy Goodman on “Democracy Now” that impeachment hearings could end up like Watergate in reverse, with today’s careerist press corps treating the notion of accountability for Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney like some kind of nutty idea.If that's true, then our nation has been hi-jacked by a "hostile Washington News Media." Scary! If that is true then it gives reason for clarity, consistency, unity and solidarity on impeachment. Rep. Miloscia compared a Bush/Cheney impeachment to the Clinton episodes. It is faulty to compare the impeachment of Clinton, which had a negative impact on the Republican Party, with a would-be impeachment of Bush/Cheney. First off, the Clinton impeachment was based on perjury over an extramarital affair. The Bush/Cheney impeachment, in stark contrast, would be about "high crimes and misdemeanors" (going to war based on false pretenses, etc.). As we were leaving Rep. Miloscia's office, he refused to accept literature in support of the Washington State  Impeachment Investigation Memorials, shoving papers back into my hands. He said something to the effect of, I'll throw these in the trash so you might as well take them back with you. At which point we were brusquely swept from his office. I appreciated the Representative taking the time to meet with us. This is an ultimately grave issue. It certainly deserves more than a casual display of attentiveness. After all, the President and Vice President, et al. drove this nation to war based on false pretenses! Thousands of American Service Personnel have suffered casualties. Millions of Iraqi people are suffering. The invasion was an act of aggression.
 The Clinton impeachment was partisan politics. It was purely political. Holding investigations into impeachable offenses by members of the Bush Administration is not a partisan issue. It is not "political" in the partisan sense. Investigating members of the Bush Administration for criminal activity is a matter of holding our officials accountable to the rule of law. It is not okay for a President, his staff, or associated interests to break the law.
At one point, the legislative aid for Senate Rules Committee Member Senator Tracy Eide refused to receive literature and notes relating to support for impeachment investigations. I witnessed the legislative assistant treating a group of supporters in a hostile manner. I also heard a story from some of the other lobbyists, who said that they met Senator Lisa Brown in a hallway. She said she wouldn't support SJM 8016 because there weren't enough votes. I assume she meant both in the State and in D.C. - but I'm not sure. Word of mouth has it that she also said she would not support SJM 8016 even if there were enough votes for it to pass. go figure (the Murray effect again?) I tried to meet with Senator Brown or her legislative aid, but I was not allowed to get near her office. Instead, three staffers kept me an my fellow lobbyists outside in the main hallway, where we were given notepads to write messages. One response to my efforts was, This isn't the first time a President has broken the rules like this and gotten away with it. Why do you want do something about it now? To which I respond, I want something done about this so that a President won't break the rules like this again.  At one point a group of about a dozen of us were huddled up and re-grouping in the hallway in a legislative building. Senator Eric Oemig happened to walk by, so we stopped him for a few minutes to thank him for his courageous leadership on this issue. He had some good advice and information. He said that the best things we can do to support impeachment are to: 1) keep applying positive pressure and offering gratitude to those legislators who are already in support of the memorials, and 2) to regularly attend the Senate Rules Committee meetings in order to encourage "pulling" the bill to the Senate floor for a vote. He said that if we can pack the Rules Committee Meetings, and communicate our cause (by wearing all black clothing, or orange t-shirts, for example), that that would be powerful.
You can also call or email legislators on the Rules Committee to formally request "pulling." Positive encouragement seems like the right thing to do. If we offer support to our state legislators, perhaps they will take action to support this memorial for impeachment investigations, and in turn offer their support to our national officials. It is up to us to hold our elected officials accountable to the rule of law. In the face of overwhelming, substantial, specific and credible evidence of wrongdoing, there is good reason to immediately commence upon impartial and unbiased investigations. We need the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth! Please visit Washington for Impeachment for more information.
| |
Impeachment
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 11:24am.I hope that wasn't difficult to read!
Do you support impeachment? why or why not
No response
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 4:29pm.I was hoping to spark some sort of response with this article.
Is it hard to read?
No.
Submitted by DJW on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 5:37pm.I think it's something that is being discussed or trying to garner support at the wrong time. The man and his administration will be out of office in a few short months. It's time for the country to start the process of healing, not of further division. Impeachment is nothing more than politics. Not disregarding your opinion, but you are not going to change my mind nor am I going to change yours.
The country spoke in Nov 06 and asked for a change to the status quo and of course nothing happened. There are no impartial political investigations as they all have something to do with politics.
I Agree With DJW
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 8:07pm.Yup
Submitted by JT on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 5:35pm.me too.
“America passes the critical gate test. Open the gate and see where people go – in or out. This is still the country people flock to.” George Will
This pretty much sums up how
Submitted by Ehver Green on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 8:17pm.Yeah, the political costs of impeachment
Submitted by Guglielmo on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 5:39pm.Sorry
Submitted by security_six on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 8:22pm.But what everyone else said works for me too.
One loves to posess arms, though they hope to never have occassion for them.
Thomas Jefferson to George Washington 1796
Did anyone read
Submitted by security_six on Thu, 02/07/2008 - 8:16pm.The Olympian today? If so I'm sure you noticed the little blurb off the AP wire. Brattleboro, Vermont is considering issue an arrest warrant for Bush and Cheney. This article from the International Herald Tribune...
One loves to posess arms, though they hope to never have occassion for them.
Thomas Jefferson to George Washington 1796
Disappointed
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 7:52am.I must say that I am disappointed with the response to impeachment that I have seen on OlyBlog as well as in the legislature and the general public.
Significant, substantial and credible evidence of misconduct by various members of the Bush Administration exists. If we choose to let them get away with it what kind of a precedent will it set?
The Bush Administration has taken executive privilege further than any other executive office. The checks and balances, upon which the equitableness of our federal government was originally founded, are being intentionally eroded in favor of the "unitary executive." Who is benefitting from this megalomaniac executive?
Certainly the petroleum and weapons related industries are reaping the rewards of Bush actions. These are two industries that need, along with the Bush Administration, need to be reigned in and regulated - for the good of the American People and the World.
Impeachment is about upholding the rule of law - it is about accountability. Elected officials who worry about elections more than holding a fellow official accountable for misconduct do a disservice to America and to Humanity.
Impeachment is a political process Rob
Submitted by Guglielmo on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 12:38pm.and anyone who would trade an attempt at impeachment now for another eight years of conservative republican rule is doing a greater disservice in my opinion. Remember, the "Rule of Law" was the battle cry of the folks who blindly went after Clinton. Sometimes you need to take some losses to win the bigger prize. Anyway, if Bush or Cheney broke any laws, does the opportunity to make them accountable end when they leave office?
I certainly understand your frustration, but I just don't share your end-game.
Miscommunication?
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 12:48pm.Well Robert
Submitted by DJW on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 12:05pm.You asked for opinions and I was being honest. I have read many of your letters and comments posted here on OlyBlog and I can appreciate your passion. I think it's misguided at this stage.
I personally don't think we are setting a precedent to allow future administrations to run rampant on our lives. I think George is the exception not the rule. I'm looking forward to change and to see how our country grow. I would not to see our country become more of a spectacle for the world to see.
Well Shoot!
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 12:51pm.I was going to say the exact same things Gug & DJW said!
Fortunately for me, they worded it much better than I could!
Besides, if there really was any grounds for impeachment, they certainly would have been impeached by now!
Edited to include: No offense Rob but I think you're really beating a dead horse and spending countless hours and expending wasted energy on impeaching 2 people who only have a few more months left in office anyway.
Maybe a better bandwagon would be one spent more locally? There are a lot of pressing issues here that would certainly benefit from your efforts, abilities and time!
Justice
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 12:49pm.Your Passion
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 12:56pm.is evident in your LTE's and posts here and I certainly wish I had your passion on a lot of issues that bother me too!
Unfortunately, the majority of America doesn't see the need for or feel impeachment is the answer or a viable option.
Certainly, if our elected officials felt impeachment was important, they would have enacted the process by now and that just hasn't happened. In fact, as you found out in your story above, our elected officials are not supportive of any impeachment process for whatever reason. Maybe they know it's unwarranted because they have more confidential information than most Americans.
Very nice response!
Submitted by DJW on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 1:14pm.I'm going to take the high road and believe that there is obviously more information that has been deemed not worthy for disclosure. I'm also going to take the opinion that if our elected officials had enough information they would have taken the opportunity to not only do what's right, but as 'pay-back' for the clinton fiasco.
But since congress has made it clear that 'impeachment' is off the table I'm going to believe that the evidence is not nearly as clear and convincing as it should be.
FYI Ornery, never a good idea to agree with me. Just ask Larry! :)
There is not more reason to believe the lack of interest in
Submitted by Guglielmo on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 1:48pm.I'll Take My Chance With Larry!
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 2:04pm.;-)
He & I don't always see eye to eye either but it's all good! Opinions are like aholes, everyone has one right?! LOL!
:)
Submitted by DJW on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 5:07pm.It seems to me that he, Robert is barking up the wrong tree.
Submitted by Tschida on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 5:39pm.Nothing to do with impeachment is going to happen unless members of congress get involved. Inslee Richert, et al will have to become involved and that is not going to happen. Why... Because the 'crimes' claimed by the fringe left don't do well with actual scrutiny. Also someone pointed out that in war time, it is political suicide, also true.
So the nuts that represent us here like State Senator Karen Fraser District 22, are wasting time and money on this issue. And for what? To appease the far left essentially.
I believe this is born out of vitriol and hatred of Bush and Chaney. (Bush derangement syndrome) however Robert is entitled to his opinion and free to share it. I wish he would not take it personally when people come across as apathetic or acutally disagree with is anger, and supportiveness of wasting Washington tax payer money.
Accountability also comes in the form of elections, not only impeachment.
P.S. Hillary Clinton is a criminal and a liar. She is trying to be elected president. Why do we not see posts from Robert about holding her accountable? Just wondering.
C.
One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
Impeachment is Practical and Responsible
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 7:54pm.Dear Chris,
I am in agreement with you that impeachment is not going to happen unless certain members of the US Congress get involved. Many members of the US Congress are involved, Representative John Conyers says that he is very close to being pushed over the edge of beginning impeachment proceedings. That is why the state initiative is important. The support of state legislatures will aid in prompting the US Legislature to take appropriate and necessary action. In fact, according the oath that representatives and senators swear to the constitution, they are required to bring impeachment proceedings.
Allegations of war crimes are not the product of the 'fringe left.' Allegations of serious misconduct by members of the Bush Administration are solid and substantial.
Impeachment is far from a waste of time. It is necessary to protect us against the next president committing the same grave wrongs.
I don't hate Bush and Cheney. Their actions however, are deserving of a strong and principled opposition. Those legislators who commit to bringing impeachment proceedings and furthering the cause of accountability for officials who betray the public trust are rightly doing their job.
With so much power over elections in the hands of the mainstream corporate media, it is important to take steps to exercise oversight over elected officials.
What we need most is a groundswell of common cause grass roots support for impeachment!
p.s. Clinton is not the President. If you believe Clinton is a liar, and that her misconduct is worthy of impeachment, bring the evidence! I don't doubt you Chris!
Everyone has one and most stink
Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 3:47pm.except mine.
Now quit talking about me behind my computer screen
So We Should Refer To You As
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 4:48pm.Rose now??? hehehehe!
"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown
Impeachment would be a waste of time
Submitted by Norm on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 7:32pm.and resources at this point. Also, what Jim said here does a pretty good job of pointing out where impeachment could provide some angry replublican voters.
...anyone who would trade an attempt at impeachment now for another eight years of conservative republican rule is doing a greater disservice in my opinion.
Just because lots of people don't agree with Mr. Bush's policies or how is handling things, does not mean they want him impeached. Don't start a war.
Waste of Time
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 8:08pm.I strongly disagree with you Norm.
Our elected officials have a constitutional duty to impeach the president in light of the misconduct that has occurred.
The only reason that impeachment proceedings would aid Republicans is if the mainstream media portrayed it negatively.
If that's the case, then our constitution and nation have truly been hi-jacked by the mainstream media.
Constitutional duty?
Submitted by Norm on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 8:43pm....it is spelled out in the constitution that presidents who don't fit the bill MUST be impeached?
You can strongly disagree with me all you want to Robert, at the end of the year though I am sure your idea will fail, and my "waste of time" argument will prevail. No offense, just my opinion.
"don't fit the bill"
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 9:01pm.Impeachment of the President and Vice President is because they have committed (allegedly) high crimes and misdemeanors. Seriously - this is not hyperbole.
It is not because he "doesn't fit the bill".
Haven't you been paying attention?
There is solid and substantial, specific and credible evidence to back up allegations of misconduct.
Again, it's not about "not fitting the bill."
Constitution in Crisis
WHOA! Settle down there big guy!
Submitted by Norm on Fri, 02/08/2008 - 9:15pm.First, I understand the phrase. I was using some colorful language because I didn't want to get too deep. Second, the sticky part of this conversation is exactly what you listed, "(allegedly)". IF an impeachment hearing happend, (doubtful) I don't think his crimes would be proven. Of course I don't think he would ever end up there at all, because he is not the first president who has come under scrutiny and had impeachment suggested. Third, if you were in charge Robert, what would you charge him with, and what evidence do you have to base your charges on? Do you honestly think you could make your case well enough? This is a political circus, and unless you are good with the audience you are going to fail.
You make it sound like it is an absolute, and that it is strange that nobody is taking action on this impeachment hearing. Yet that is exactly what is happening....not enough people with the power to approach this care. Ask yourself "why?" and don't take it out on us who just think that this is a waste of time.
Conspiracy to Defraud the United States
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 1:09am.here's an excerpt:
The Conspiracy to Defraud the United States
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 1:28am.Scott McClellan, False Statements, Impeachment
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 1:25pm.All Your References Are Great But...
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 2:37pm.they're all talk and no action!
Can you explain why there's been nobody willing to take any steps to impeach? We've explained to you our theories. I'd like to know why you think you're pursuing beating a dead horse over & over & over when clearly you're beating your head against a brick wall, wasting valuable time, resources and energy that could be more helpful locally than nationally.
"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown
just a wild guess
Submitted by enpen on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 2:44pm.But maybe something about it being a corrupted and unrepresentative system rewarding fraternalism rather than public due diligence toward the greater good. What other insider racket is capable of granting criminal clemency?
"In principle, I am an anarchist. Kurt Vonnegut once said he was an agnostic who respects Jesus Christ. I am an anarchist who loves democracy." - Kenzaburo Oe
ding ding ding
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 06/17/2008 - 11:51pm.It's pretty clear that Rob's motives are pretty principled.
Submitted by Guglielmo on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 4:15pm.all talk, no action
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 4:50pm.Counter Punch? Tomsdispatch?
Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:05am.I hardly call these resourses. Sites like these are why I firmly belive in the reality of Bush Derangement Syndrome, and why I call this kind of stuff, clap trap and fringe left poppycock.
C.
One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
Bush Derangement Sydrome
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:09am.Edify yourself.
Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:15am.Another noted facet of BDS-like behavior is that it may appear to be a merely reflexive opposition to any position advocated by Bush for no other reason than that Bush happens to be advocating it.[11]
Krauthammer, a former psychiatrist who earned his M.D. from Harvard Medical School, defined BDS as "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush".[2][12] While Krauthammer's column was somewhat tongue-in-cheek (eg., "What is worrying epidemiologists about the Dean incident, however, is that heretofore no case had been reported in Vermont, or any other dairy state"), the term reflects a belief that some criticisms of President Bush — for example, a description of him as the greatest current threat to American lives — are of emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic.[13]
One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
The Dunce
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 1:42am.The Dunce:
And just think, he out scored Kerry!
Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 10:24am.One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
Bush v Kerry
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:31pm.Actually, on the popular vote, Kerry won. Bush only won in the electoral college, and with great controversy. Do you remember?
Various inconsistencies in the voting tabulation that were attributed to the influence of Diebold electronic voting machines.
The owner of Diebold so famously promised to deliver an Ohio win to GWB. It was very controversial. Voting Machine Controversy
by Julie Carr Smyth
The Aug. 14 letter from Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold Inc. - who has become active in the re-election effort of President Bush - prompted Democrats this week to question the propriety of allowing O'Dell's company to calculate votes in the 2004 presidential election...
Non Sequitur?
Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:34pm.Bush out scored Lurch in College. That is what I was responding to in your post called "dunce".
C
One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
Bush outscored lurch in college
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:36pm.I know what "BDS" is supposed to mean.
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 8:07am.Nothing has changed Gug.
Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 10:33am.BDS goes beyond what your saying. What you are trying to do is dismiss it. Even though it is a bit toung in cheek, it has some veracity. Do I consider myself perfect? Have I ever said as much? Of course not. So dismiss it and move on if you wish.
C.
One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
I guess not, unfortunately.
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 10:36am.There is no new anything.
Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 10:41am.I have not tried to conscienously change anything about my style. We just disagree, and you think I am reverting to something different I guess...
One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
Definately, yes
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 10:50am.no new anything
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:28pm.Everything is just made of dirt, right Chris? Love and compassion are useless frivolities on the road of life. Power and accuracy are what's important. [forgive my sarcasm]
Chris, are you sure that you weren't making a conscious effort to change your ways?
About your Thomas Sowell quote, Do you believe that a free market exists in the USA?
Do I need to respond?
Submitted by Tschida on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:35pm.One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
thomas sowell
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:40pm.I haven't read anything by him. What kind of stuff does he write?
Don't you think that regulation prohibits a free market? How can a free market exist in the presence of regulation?
Thomas Sowell
Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:51pm.Thanks Rob
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:58pm.It's really easy to dismiss BDS, Tsch
Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 12:40pm.Yeah his education is expired ! So it must not count!!
Submitted by Tschida on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 1:31pm.One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
Free Market
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 2:46pm.That point does not exist in any practical sense
Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 3:19pm.Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.! --John Maynard Keynes
Capitalism cannot exist
Submitted by Phil Owen on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 3:33pm.without government intervention. Police, military, etc.
Capitalism without any government intervention would be the fastest possible path to communism. Just imagine if the labor unions of the 19th and 20th centuries never had to face the state militia? Capitalists don't really want a laissez-faire system, they want a system that favors them.
The Canaanite's Call
Yep,
Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 3:36pm.Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.! --John Maynard Keynes
Good quote from Senior.
Submitted by Phil Owen on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 3:47pm.We rarely hear... of the combinations of masters; though frequently of those of workmen. But whoever imagines, upon this account, that masters rarely combine, is as ignorant of the world as of the subject. Masters are always and every where in a sort of tacit, but constant and uniform combination, not to raise the wages of labour above their actual rate. To violate this combination is every where a most unpopular action, and a sort of reproach to a master among his neighbors and equals.... -Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations)
The Canaanite's Call
OT
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Sat, 02/09/2008 - 2:50pm.Why are all the responses coming out italicized?
"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown
Sowel reminds me of one of my favorite quotations
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 1:09pm.So Rob
Submitted by Norm on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 1:09pm.Yes
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 1:38pm.This is what I intended to communicate when I wrote about setting a precedent. I am sorry if I didn't communicate that clearly previously.
Yes, I think impeachment would be helpful in order to show future presidents that behavior of the type exhibited by the Bush Administration is not acceptable.
Do you feel this way about all crime?
Submitted by Norm on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 1:41pm.Did I miss the part where Rob advocated
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 1:45pm.I simply asked
Submitted by Norm on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 1:54pm.Nope
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 2:06pm.Guess not
Submitted by Norm on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 2:08pm.nt
All Crime
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 2:37pm.Yes, I feel that remedial consequences are appropriate for all crime. Did Brianna Waters commit a crime? I don't know, and my understanding is that that is yet to be determined.
Without knowing the details of the case, perhaps it can be argued that Ms. Waters was in fact serving the cause of justice. Perhaps she can use a necessity defense. I don't know.
I do know that for my part in the PMR blockade actions, I was not committing a crime. I was, in fact making an effort to stop criminal action - the criminal action of our government.
Why do so many Americans have difficulty accepting the reality that members of our government commit crimes?
You did, in fact, commit a crime Robert
Submitted by Norm on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 2:39pm.and "justified" is ruled by a judge, jury, or prosecuting attorney, not you. IF Ms. Waters played the lookout part to an arson, then she commited a crime as well, and I seriously doubt anyone, beyond the local fruitloops, would say she was justified in doing so.
Thanks for answering my question.
Justification
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 3:11pm.I don't know enough about Ms. Waters' case to comment.
Perhaps I committed a crime. Perhaps not. What I know that I did do was make an effort to stop a crime of the most grave nature that is currently being committed by the government of the USA.
According to the Nuremberg Tribunal and Principles, I was justified in so doing because we have a duty oppose the greatest offense known to humankind, which is military aggression.
In the absence of a cause for self-defense and in the presence of hundreds of false statements, which were specifically designed to create an environment of acceptability, the invasion can right be understood to have been an act of aggression.
Is it a crime to speed on the roadway? Yes. Does law enforcement speed on the roadway in order to apprehend suspects? Yes.
My participation in a blockade was an attempt to apprehend suspects (Members of the Bush Administration) by attracting attention to the illegal nature of the occupation.
Rob violated a city ordinace
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 3:33pm.Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.! --John Maynard Keynes
criminal
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 4:04pm.well, technically not a criminal until [edit: UNLESS] convicted...
Crime (noun):
1. An act committed or omitted in violation of a law forbidding or commanding it and for which punishment is imposed upon conviction.
2. Unlawful activity: statistics relating to violent crime.
3. A serious offense, especially one in violation of morality.
4. An unjust, senseless, or disgraceful act or condition: It's a crime to squander our country's natural resources.
http://www.answers.com/topic/crime
You should really push for Super Criminal status
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 4:09pm.Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.! --John Maynard Keynes
Oooh Kitty!
Submitted by security_six on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 4:14pm.Why are fluffy persian cats associated with supercriminals? Personally I would think a Maine Coon would be a better choice.... Huge, regal, fluffy and heavy... Ever have one of those jump up on your lap while reading? :-)
"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so." -Ford Prefect
Norm's Absolutely Right!
Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 4:56pm.and no matter how angelic a website makes Ms. Waters look and sound, if she admitted she was a lookout or there's proof she was, she should be convicted.
"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown
Don't think anyone here is arguing otherwise.
Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 5:07pm.Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.! --John Maynard Keynes
Hard to Ignore Impeachment
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Tue, 06/17/2008 - 11:59pm.Impeachment is a moral necessity.
Why doesn't Congress want to Impeach? - A Theory
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 06/18/2008 - 2:08am.That's one reason why Congress is reluctant to impeach. It's because they know that they will look like fools for only now holding Bush accountable for something that was obvious all along.
This nation is stricken with shock and awe. I am impressed with the brazen qualities of this Administration's actions. Anything less mightn't have been successful.
However, it was suspicious when, even just a few short days after 9/11/2001, members of the Bush Administration began making noises about Iraq. It took a full 18 months to get the invasion. False statements and false pretenses all along the way. It's obvious to anyone who was paying attention. Obvious to anyone who wasn't victim to the fear-mongering of this venomous administration.
It's about oil. Thousands of U.S. soldiers have been killed, many 10's of thousands are suffering permanent and very grievous war-related injuries. Millions of Iraqis have died and suffer as a result of an unnecessary invasion. Follow the money on this one. Look to the motive. Oil. Global dominance. It's sinister and sick. And to do nothing is wrong.
Congress should have been there. Congress wasn't there. And for that they are culpable, and understandably reluctant to bring impeachment for something that they never should have allowed or gone along with in the first place.
Congress however, has a chance to redeem itself by admitting its mistakes and seeking to hold the masterminds accountable. Aggression, crimes against the peace, crimes against humanity, crimes against the constitution, advocacy of an endless war prosecuted against enemies of our own making: These are the actions and policies of madmen and social delinquents.
There is still time to deal consequences to these individuals. May Justice be served.
a sweet quote
Submitted by enpen on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 12:45am."While the current contracts are unrelated to the companies' previous work in Iraq, in a twist of corporate history for some of the world's largest companies, all four oil majors that had lost their concessions in Iraq are now back."
International Herald Tribune: Deals with Iraq are set to bring oil giants back
"In principle, I am an anarchist. Kurt Vonnegut once said he was an agnostic who respects Jesus Christ. I am an anarchist who loves democracy." - Kenzaburo Oe
May Justice be Served.
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 1:15am.We have witnessed the ultimate corporate take-over of our government. We have an unruly executive branch that is filled with oil industry executives who launched an unnecessary and aggressive invasion and occupation of a nation in the most oil rich region of the world. These people repeatedly lied and made false statements in order to create the social conditions necessary for invasion.
It's wrong. This is truly akin to the Nazis of WWII. There is no veil covering it up. It's about oil. The same reason the Nazi's were warring - for resources - for their corporations.
Wake up people. wake up. wake up. It's so sad, maybe it's a loss - because the establishment media is simply not going to expose the reality for what it is. Unless Congress forces them to. But, sadly, I think Congress is complicit.
Maybe we can get changes with a new Congress. oh yeah, but wait, will the establishment media allow enough challengers to gain office? We'll see.
It's so sad to know that it's about oil - and a policy of global dominance. So many suffer and so many kill. All for power and control. We're killing each other and the Earth. What will we leave for future generations? Indeed, what?
Nazi's Robert?
Submitted by Laurian on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 5:13am.Godwin's law
Submitted by security_six on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 9:27am.Strikes again!
"It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress." --Mark Twain
Godwin's Law Doesn't Apply
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 2:38pm.Insurgents are more akin to freedom fighters - at least as far as the anti-occupation insurgency in Iraq.
But the Bush Administration invasion and occupation does share some striking similarities with the Nazi expansion's prior to and during WWII.
There are also similarities between domestic occurrences now in the USA and the domestic environment in Nazi Germany.
It's not hyperbole.
Umm no....
Submitted by security_six on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 10:44pm.Godwin's Law states... "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Godwin's Law has been expanded to pretty much any threaded conversation. Nothing about if the comparison is accurate, inaccurate, or simply stupid, but that as a discussion grows longer the probability of a a comparision involving Nazis or Hitler rises.
Crimes akin to Nazi Holocaust
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Fri, 06/20/2008 - 2:33pm.They want to continue the occupation for 100 years. How many Iraqis might be killed in that time span.
The fundamental drive for the war is to control petroleum resources. It's just wrong to use violence to take mineral resources.
The logic is good. The rhetoric is true.