Mr. President, for 6 years the President has demonstrated time and again that he doesn't respect the role of Congress, nor does he respect the rule of law. It is the latter point that I want to address this morning because it is the rule of law which draws us all together, regardless of politics, ideology, or party. It is the rule of law, not of men, which we swear to uphold when we take the oath of office in this Chamber, as Members do in the other Chamber, and certainly as the President does on January 20 every 4 years.
For 6 years this President has used scare tactics to prevent the Congress from reining in his abuse of authority. A case in point is the current direction this body appears to be headed in as we prepare to reform and extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Many of the unprecedented rollbacks to the rule of law by this administration have been made in the name of national security. The Bush administration has relentlessly focused our Nation's resources and manpower on a war of choice in Iraq. That ill-conceived war has broken our military, squandered our resources, and emboldened our enemies.
The President's wholesale disregard of the rule of law has compounded the damage done in Iraq, made our Nation less secure, and as a direct consequence of these acts, we are far less secure, far more vulnerable, and certainly far more isolated in the world today.
Consider the scandal at Abu Ghraib, where Iraqi prisoners were subjected to inhumane, humiliating acts by U.S. personnel charged with guarding them.
Consider Guantanamo Bay. Rather than helping to protect the Nation by aggressively prosecuting prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, these individuals have instead become the symbol of our weakened moral standing in the world. Who would have ever imagined it?
Consider the secret prisons run by the Central Intelligence Agency and the practice of extraordinary rendition that allows them to evade U.S. law regarding torture.
Consider the shameful actions of our outgoing Attorney General who politicized prosecutions in the U.S. Attorney's Office, who was more committed to serving the President who appointed him than laws he was sworn to uphold as Attorney General.
Consider the Military Commissions Act, a law that allows evidence obtained through torture to be admitted into evidence.
It denies individuals the right to counsel.
It denies them the right to invoke the Geneva Conventions.
And it denies them the single most important and effective safeguard of liberty man has ever known, the right of habeas corpus, permitting prisoners to be brought before a court to determine whether their detainment is lawful.
Warrantless wiretapping, torture, the list goes on.
Each of these policies share two things in common.
First, they have severely weakened our ability to prosecute the global war on terrorism, if for no other reason than they have made it harder, if not impossible, to build the kind of international support and cooperation we absolutely need to succeed in our efforts against stateless terrorism.
And second, each has only been possible because the U.S. Congress has not been able to stop the President in his unprecedented expansion of executive power; although I might add, some in this body have certainly tried.
Whether these policies were explicitly authorized is beside the point. In every instance, Congress has been unable to hold this administration to account for violating the rule of law and our Constitution. In each instance, Republicans in the Congress have prevented this body from telling this administration that a state of war is not a blank check.
And those are not my words. Those are the words of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, nominated by President Ronald Reagan.
Today, it appears that we are prepared to consider the proposed renewal of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a law that whatever form it eventually takes will almost certainly permit the Bush administration to broadly eavesdrop on American citizens.
Legislation, as currently drafted, that would grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that helped this administration violate the civil liberties of Americans and the law of this Nation.
While it may be true that the proposed legislation is an improvement over existing law, it remains fundamentally flawed because it fails to protect the privacy rights of Americans or hold the Executive or the private sector accountable if they choose to ignore the law.
That is why I will not stand on the floor of the Senate and be silent about the direction we are about to take.
It is time to say: No more.
No more trampling on our Constitution.
No more excusing those who violate the rule of law.
These are fundamental, basic, eternal principles. They have been around, some of them, for as long as the Magna Carta.
They are enduring.
What they are not is temporary.
And what we do not do in a time where our country is at risk is abandon them.
My father served as executive trial counsel at the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals in 1945 and 1946. What America accomplished at those historic trials was not a foregone conclusion. It took courage.
When Joseph Stalin and even a leader as great and noble as Winston Churchill wanted to simply execute the Nazi leaders, we didn't back down in this country from our belief that these men, as terrible as they were -- some of the worst violators in the court of history of mankind -- ought to have a trial. We did not give in to vengeance.
As then, the issue before us today is the same.
Does America stand for all that is still right with our world. Or do we retreat in fear?
Do we stand for justice that secures America, or do we act out of vengeance that weakens us?
I am well aware this issue is seen as political. I believe Democrats were elected to help strengthen our Nation, elected to help restore our standing in the world. I believe we were elected to ensure that this Nation adheres to the rule of law and to stop the administration's assault on our Constitution.
But the rule of law is not the province of any one political party. It is the province of each and every one of us as American citizens, on our watch and our generation, to make sure we are safer because of its inviolable provisions.
Mr. President, I know this bill has not been reported out of the Judiciary Committee yet.
But I am here today because if I have learned anything in my 26 years in this body, particularly over the last 7 years, it is that if you wait until the end to voice your concerns, you will have waited too long. That is why I have written the majority leader informing him that I will object to any effort to bring the legislation to the Senate floor for consideration.
I hope my colleague, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Leahy is able to remove this language from the FISA bill. Pat Leahy is as strong a defender of the Constitution as any Member of this body.
But if he is unable to do so, I am prepared to filibuster this bill.
President Bush is right about one thing: The debate is about security but not in the way he imagines it.
He believes we have to give up certain rights to be safe.
I believe the choice between moral authority and security is a false choice. I believe it is precisely when you stand up and protect your rights that you become stronger, not weaker, as a nation.
The damage that was done to our country on 9/11 was stunning. It changed the world forever.
But when you start diminishing our rights as a people, you compound that tragedy. You cannot protect America in the long run if you fail to protect our Constitution. It is that simple.
History will likely judge this President harshly for his war of choice and for fighting it with a disregard for our most cherished principles.
But history is about tomorrow. We must act today and stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law.
Mr. President, this is the moment. At long last, let us rise up to it.
I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort.
Senator Chris Dodd
Congressional website
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Words of Wisdom from a Small Town Newspaper
THE COMMON PEOPLE
It took common people - farmers, brewers, printers, silversmiths - to write the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights some 218 years ago. And it looks as if it's up to the common people to try to defend those principles.
Somebody has to step up here.
The Bush administration mocks each provision of the Bill of Rights that protects private citizens from their government, and likewise pushes past constitutional constraints that protect other branches of government from the presidency.
Meanwhile, most federal courts equivocate their way to approve most of these actions, and Congress, even though in control of the opposition party, dithers and compromises away our basic rights for fear of accusations of being soft on terror. The media, meanwhile, fawns and yawns its way through this immense power grab, distracted by the search for another faux pas by Britney Spears or startling new evidence about who killed Princess Diana.
The good news comes out of 12 jurors in a Dallas courtroom on Monday. The jury sat and listened for two months to the testimony of federal agents, Israeli intelligence officers, wiretaps, videotapes and saw thousands of documents produced by government prosecutors. They worked their way through 197 counts of charges against a charitable fund raising organization called the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a Muslim organization that says it directs funds to the construction of hospitals and providing food for the poor in Palestine.
More in the Port Townsend and Jefferson County Leader ...
My take on it in an earlier post.
It took common people - farmers, brewers, printers, silversmiths - to write the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights some 218 years ago. And it looks as if it's up to the common people to try to defend those principles.
Somebody has to step up here.
The Bush administration mocks each provision of the Bill of Rights that protects private citizens from their government, and likewise pushes past constitutional constraints that protect other branches of government from the presidency.
Meanwhile, most federal courts equivocate their way to approve most of these actions, and Congress, even though in control of the opposition party, dithers and compromises away our basic rights for fear of accusations of being soft on terror. The media, meanwhile, fawns and yawns its way through this immense power grab, distracted by the search for another faux pas by Britney Spears or startling new evidence about who killed Princess Diana.
The good news comes out of 12 jurors in a Dallas courtroom on Monday. The jury sat and listened for two months to the testimony of federal agents, Israeli intelligence officers, wiretaps, videotapes and saw thousands of documents produced by government prosecutors. They worked their way through 197 counts of charges against a charitable fund raising organization called the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a Muslim organization that says it directs funds to the construction of hospitals and providing food for the poor in Palestine.
More in the Port Townsend and Jefferson County Leader ...
My take on it in an earlier post.
Time again for Another Rousing Round of Write Your Own Caption
Feel free to post them in the comments.
The Family Values Party Strikes Again, Part 2
McConnell marks funds for contractor
FIRM UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR BRIBERY
By John Cheves
JCHEVES@HERALD-LEADER.COM
Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is pushing $25 million in earmarked federal funds for a British defense contractor that is under criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department and suspected by American diplomats of a "longstanding, widespread pattern of bribery allegations."
McConnell tucked money for three weapons projects for BAE Systems into the defense appropriations bill, which the Senate approved Oct. 3. The Defense Department failed to include the money in its own budget request, which required McConnell to intercede, said BAE spokeswoman Susan Lenover.
More following the click ...
My comment: It seem the Republicans are always more than willing to provide the best government that money can buy.
FIRM UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR BRIBERY
By John Cheves
JCHEVES@HERALD-LEADER.COM
Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is pushing $25 million in earmarked federal funds for a British defense contractor that is under criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department and suspected by American diplomats of a "longstanding, widespread pattern of bribery allegations."
McConnell tucked money for three weapons projects for BAE Systems into the defense appropriations bill, which the Senate approved Oct. 3. The Defense Department failed to include the money in its own budget request, which required McConnell to intercede, said BAE spokeswoman Susan Lenover.
More following the click ...
My comment: It seem the Republicans are always more than willing to provide the best government that money can buy.
Blast from the Past
Over 500 vintage and modified cars from all over the southwest.
I'm a sucker for a pretty hood ornament.
They simply don't make Vettes the way they used to.
They don't make a lot of things the way they used to.
Vote for the New, Friendlier Blackwater Logo
Blackwater, the
Vote here for a new, friendlier logo for the poor, misunderstood security contractor ...
Jingoism defined
"That inverted patriotism whereby the love of one's own nation is transformed into the hatred of another nation, and the fierce craving to destroy individual members of that other nation ...
Jingoism is the passion of the spectator, the inciter, the backer, not of the fighter."
Sourced here ...
Jingoism is the passion of the spectator, the inciter, the backer, not of the fighter."
Sourced here ...
Friday, October 26, 2007
FEMA stages fake press conference
By STEVE WATKINS / Federal Times
October 26, 2007
The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s deputy administrator, Harvey Johnson, had an unusually friendly audience at an Oct. 23 news briefing on his agency’s response to the California wildfires: his own spokesmen.
FEMA drafted at least four of its employees to play the part of reporters at a hastily called news conference when no members of the media showed up, spokesman Aaron Walker said. No reporters showed because FEMA announced the news conference only 15 minutes before it began. All reporters could do was call in on a phone line that did not let them to ask questions.
More after the click ...
My thought: Hell, why not? It goes right along with the fake emergency response, the faked concern by those at the top of the administration food chain, the fake offers of emergency aid and the fake follow through on promises.
Let's relate this to the Conservative Republican philosophy of "smaller government", which sounds good on the face of it ... and their strategy of "starving the beast" as a means to get there.
"Starving the beast" is simply not funding or underfunding mandated government programs. This has been the approach with virtually every government program for the last decade and a half (with the exception of military spending - no problem there). The consequences - the current fire situation in California is a prime example - don't show up immediately. However, there is a significant cumulative effect over time.
Here's how it works - and this example is from personal experience. We moved to Arizona in May, 2003. The Aspen Fire filled our front window and burned from June 17, 2003 for about a month on Mount Lemmon, part of the Santa Catalina Mountains located in the Coronado National Forest north of Tucson, Arizona, and in the surrounding area. It burned 84,750 acres (343 km²) of land, and destroyed 340 homes and businesses of the town of Summerhaven.
Damages to electric lines, phone lines, water facilities, streets and sewers totaled $4.1 million dollars. Firefighting cost was about $17 million, and the Forest Service is spending $2.7 million dollars to prevent soil loss.
In 2002, the year before the fire started, Congress had been requested to allocate about $2,000,000 to cover the implementation of fire prevention measures in the Colorado National Forest. However, that allocation was reduced to about $150,000 in the Congressional budget process.
Remember, it was a Republican controlled Congress that was managing the budget process and "Starving the Beast" saved taxpayers $1.85 million in 2002. They pointed to the savings as an example of how "fiscally responsible" they were.
However, they are not so eager to mention that savings were dwarfed by the $23.8 million it cost tax payers to control and correct the damage - not to mention the countless dollars residents of Summerhaven spent to rebuild their homes. Now that's where their short sighted fiscally responsible approach took us when you count ALL the beans.
In a related item:
In what seems to be an oft repeated theme, the Bush Administration again put politics over policy. And that has had an effect on the forests of Southern California.
San Bernardino National Forest Supervisor Gene Zimmerman has harsh words for D.C. regarding preparations for large-scale forest fires, and was told to shred his report on forest renewal during the drought in 2002:
Before the string of blazes that lay siege this week to nearly all of Southern California, even before the historic firestorms of 2003, then-San Bernardino National Forest Supervisor Gene Zimmerman told his bosses in Washington about the problem before him.
The most populous national forest faced a mounting threat of catastrophic fire, and reducing it would cost a lot of money, he said.
[...]
And back in 2002:
He [Zimmerman] said it would take a lot of money and a lot of time to return the forest to health -- $300 million at $30 million a year for 10 years, to adequately reduce the fire danger facing the tens of thousands of residents in Lake Arrowhead, Big Bear, Idyllwild and other forest communities.
In the months before the October 2003 fires, Zimmerman was told during a conference call to shred the document, he said during an interview this week.
Sourced here ...
My comment: If the facts don't fit your ideology, change the facts.
October 26, 2007
The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s deputy administrator, Harvey Johnson, had an unusually friendly audience at an Oct. 23 news briefing on his agency’s response to the California wildfires: his own spokesmen.
FEMA drafted at least four of its employees to play the part of reporters at a hastily called news conference when no members of the media showed up, spokesman Aaron Walker said. No reporters showed because FEMA announced the news conference only 15 minutes before it began. All reporters could do was call in on a phone line that did not let them to ask questions.
More after the click ...
My thought: Hell, why not? It goes right along with the fake emergency response, the faked concern by those at the top of the administration food chain, the fake offers of emergency aid and the fake follow through on promises.
Let's relate this to the Conservative Republican philosophy of "smaller government", which sounds good on the face of it ... and their strategy of "starving the beast" as a means to get there.
"Starving the beast" is simply not funding or underfunding mandated government programs. This has been the approach with virtually every government program for the last decade and a half (with the exception of military spending - no problem there). The consequences - the current fire situation in California is a prime example - don't show up immediately. However, there is a significant cumulative effect over time.
Here's how it works - and this example is from personal experience. We moved to Arizona in May, 2003. The Aspen Fire filled our front window and burned from June 17, 2003 for about a month on Mount Lemmon, part of the Santa Catalina Mountains located in the Coronado National Forest north of Tucson, Arizona, and in the surrounding area. It burned 84,750 acres (343 km²) of land, and destroyed 340 homes and businesses of the town of Summerhaven.
Damages to electric lines, phone lines, water facilities, streets and sewers totaled $4.1 million dollars. Firefighting cost was about $17 million, and the Forest Service is spending $2.7 million dollars to prevent soil loss.
In 2002, the year before the fire started, Congress had been requested to allocate about $2,000,000 to cover the implementation of fire prevention measures in the Colorado National Forest. However, that allocation was reduced to about $150,000 in the Congressional budget process.
Remember, it was a Republican controlled Congress that was managing the budget process and "Starving the Beast" saved taxpayers $1.85 million in 2002. They pointed to the savings as an example of how "fiscally responsible" they were.
However, they are not so eager to mention that savings were dwarfed by the $23.8 million it cost tax payers to control and correct the damage - not to mention the countless dollars residents of Summerhaven spent to rebuild their homes. Now that's where their short sighted fiscally responsible approach took us when you count ALL the beans.
In a related item:
In what seems to be an oft repeated theme, the Bush Administration again put politics over policy. And that has had an effect on the forests of Southern California.
San Bernardino National Forest Supervisor Gene Zimmerman has harsh words for D.C. regarding preparations for large-scale forest fires, and was told to shred his report on forest renewal during the drought in 2002:
Before the string of blazes that lay siege this week to nearly all of Southern California, even before the historic firestorms of 2003, then-San Bernardino National Forest Supervisor Gene Zimmerman told his bosses in Washington about the problem before him.
The most populous national forest faced a mounting threat of catastrophic fire, and reducing it would cost a lot of money, he said.
[...]
And back in 2002:
He [Zimmerman] said it would take a lot of money and a lot of time to return the forest to health -- $300 million at $30 million a year for 10 years, to adequately reduce the fire danger facing the tens of thousands of residents in Lake Arrowhead, Big Bear, Idyllwild and other forest communities.
In the months before the October 2003 fires, Zimmerman was told during a conference call to shred the document, he said during an interview this week.
Sourced here ...
My comment: If the facts don't fit your ideology, change the facts.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
The Catholic Indian Mission Pedophiles Must Not Go Unpunished
We've come to help you with those problems you never had before we came.
Tim Giago, commentator on Native American issues
Writing about lawsuits can be like going to the dentist; it can be numbing and very painful. With that I will try to be as brief (no pun intended) as possible.
Two lawsuits involving the physical, mental and sexual abuse of Indian children while living and studying at Indian mission boarding schools will be heard by the South Dakota Supreme Court to determine if the suits should be dismissed because they have exceeded the statute of limitations.
Attorney Greg Yates of Rapid City, SD is representing the plaintiffs. Yates also has a law office in California, and he is a graduate of the University of South Dakota School of Law. He believes that some of the local news coverage has been inadequate and slanted toward the defendants.
The rest after the click ...
Headscarf on the left: NO! Headscarf on the right: OK
Quoting a comment posted on little green footballs, a right leaning blog:
"I've been to the Muslim world and I've walked around their mosques and been treated as a special guest by devout Muslims. NOT ONCE did they make me put on a veil or do anything to impose their religion on me. They knew I was Catholic and they respected that. This headscarf show is purely submission by Nance in a bid to suck up to her Islamofascist masters. No westerner does that unless she wants to do that. Knowing what real Muslims are like, this is clearly kowtowing from Nance. It makes me sick."
following the click ...
Oh, NO ... wait ... my mistake. The vitriolic poster was talking about Nancy Pilosi and HER bout with a hajib ... not the venerable and venerated Laura Bush!
I think my head is going to explode! But I DO like the part about sucking up to her Islamofascist masters.
Open Letter to "Generation Screwed"
Dear Generation Screwed,
Where are you?
Haven't heard or seen anything from you while the Bush Administration drives you, your children, and your children's children into perpetual war and debt.
Don't see you at meetings. Don't read you on the op-ed pages. Can't even find you on the Internet, Nothing. Not even a text message. What's up with that?
And you really are screwed, you know. These jokers are borrowing the money to fund the war in Iraq, and putting your name down as co-signer. They're not raising taxes to pay for it. They're borrowing it.
Who do you think is going to pay all that back with interest? Not George Bush. Not Dick Cheney. Not the huge international corporations who are profiting from the war. Not the Baby Boom. No.
You are. You're going to pay it back. You and your children and your children's children. Some estimates say it'll be more than $2 trillion before they're through with Iraq.
A billion is a thousand million. A trillion is a thousand billion. That's one million million. $2 trillion is $2 thousand billion - $2 million million. Not counting interest.
You are so screwed. You're screwed eight ways from Tuesday, Monday through Friday and time and a half on weekends. You're screwed at school, on the job, in the housing market and at the store. And when you get old, you can look forward to spending your golden years screwed, too.
So where are you? Down in the basement trading bong hits and playing Guitar Hero?
Following the click ...
My comment - I came of age in the 1960s with the Civil Rights Movement, the Free Speech Movement and the Vietnam War Protests. I marched with the Congress of Racial Equality in Syracuse, New York, protesting the racist hiring policies of Niagara Mohawk, the regional power company. Friends of mine volunteered as medics at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968. Other friends were drafted and died in the war. Those who returned were never the same. I was a draft resister during the war. I protested injustice then and I've very concerned now as I watch the current crop of young people totally absorbed in themselves and totally unconcerned about where we are collectively headed.
My generation changed the world and, because we didn't have all those lovely luxuries like cell phones, the Internet, computers, digital cameras and a myriad of other things you take for granted ... we invented them.
You are now faced with a crisis. It is a crisis that will effect you for the rest of your life and for the duration of the lives of your children and your children's children.
If you don't take control of your destiny, someone else will. And if you let that happen, you may not like where they take you.
Where are you?
Haven't heard or seen anything from you while the Bush Administration drives you, your children, and your children's children into perpetual war and debt.
Don't see you at meetings. Don't read you on the op-ed pages. Can't even find you on the Internet, Nothing. Not even a text message. What's up with that?
And you really are screwed, you know. These jokers are borrowing the money to fund the war in Iraq, and putting your name down as co-signer. They're not raising taxes to pay for it. They're borrowing it.
Who do you think is going to pay all that back with interest? Not George Bush. Not Dick Cheney. Not the huge international corporations who are profiting from the war. Not the Baby Boom. No.
You are. You're going to pay it back. You and your children and your children's children. Some estimates say it'll be more than $2 trillion before they're through with Iraq.
A billion is a thousand million. A trillion is a thousand billion. That's one million million. $2 trillion is $2 thousand billion - $2 million million. Not counting interest.
You are so screwed. You're screwed eight ways from Tuesday, Monday through Friday and time and a half on weekends. You're screwed at school, on the job, in the housing market and at the store. And when you get old, you can look forward to spending your golden years screwed, too.
So where are you? Down in the basement trading bong hits and playing Guitar Hero?
Following the click ...
My comment - I came of age in the 1960s with the Civil Rights Movement, the Free Speech Movement and the Vietnam War Protests. I marched with the Congress of Racial Equality in Syracuse, New York, protesting the racist hiring policies of Niagara Mohawk, the regional power company. Friends of mine volunteered as medics at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968. Other friends were drafted and died in the war. Those who returned were never the same. I was a draft resister during the war. I protested injustice then and I've very concerned now as I watch the current crop of young people totally absorbed in themselves and totally unconcerned about where we are collectively headed.
My generation changed the world and, because we didn't have all those lovely luxuries like cell phones, the Internet, computers, digital cameras and a myriad of other things you take for granted ... we invented them.
You are now faced with a crisis. It is a crisis that will effect you for the rest of your life and for the duration of the lives of your children and your children's children.
If you don't take control of your destiny, someone else will. And if you let that happen, you may not like where they take you.
Reciprocation
NAPLES (Reuters) - Ecuador's leftist President Rafael Correa said Washington must let him open a military base in Miami if the United States wants to keep using an air base on Ecuador's Pacific coast.
Correa has refused to renew Washington's lease on the Manta air base, set to expire in 2009. U.S. officials say it is vital for counter-narcotics surveillance operations on Pacific drug-running routes.
"We'll renew the base on one condition: that they let us put a base in Miami -- an Ecuadorean base," Correa said in an interview during a trip to Italy.
"If there's no problem having foreign soldiers on a country's soil, surely they'll let us have an Ecuadorean base in the United States.
After the click ...
My thought: And this is totally unreasonable because?
Correa has refused to renew Washington's lease on the Manta air base, set to expire in 2009. U.S. officials say it is vital for counter-narcotics surveillance operations on Pacific drug-running routes.
"We'll renew the base on one condition: that they let us put a base in Miami -- an Ecuadorean base," Correa said in an interview during a trip to Italy.
"If there's no problem having foreign soldiers on a country's soil, surely they'll let us have an Ecuadorean base in the United States.
After the click ...
My thought: And this is totally unreasonable because?
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Bush Quips He Might Stay in Power
(Threat Level Plays Along)
By Kevin Poulsen; Wired Magazine
At a press briefing this morning that touched on issues like the White House's extrajudicial wiretapping program and torture policies, the president was asked a question about Vladimir Putin's plan to hold on to power when his term as Russian president runs out.
Ahahahahaha. That's funny. It's a great comedian who can give voice to what everyone else is just thinking.
More after the click ...
My take: Just joking. I wouldn't want to be thought of as a conspiracy nut! Funny, though. Real funny. He was joking about World War III, too. Wasn't he?
By Kevin Poulsen; Wired Magazine
At a press briefing this morning that touched on issues like the White House's extrajudicial wiretapping program and torture policies, the president was asked a question about Vladimir Putin's plan to hold on to power when his term as Russian president runs out.
Reporter: Mr. President, following up on Vladimir Putin for a moment, he said recently that next year, when he has to step down according to the constitution, as the president, he may become prime minister; in effect keeping power and dashing any hopes for a genuine democratic transition there ...
Bush: I've been planning that myself.
Ahahahahaha. That's funny. It's a great comedian who can give voice to what everyone else is just thinking.
More after the click ...
My take: Just joking. I wouldn't want to be thought of as a conspiracy nut! Funny, though. Real funny. He was joking about World War III, too. Wasn't he?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)