Nancy Pelosi: Mouse Speaker

August 29, 2008 · Filed under Bush v Congress · Tagged , , , , , , , ,

CNN and Digg teamed up to interview the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi in yet another earth-shattering rendition of the same old tired status quo performance we’ve seen Nancy perform with stunning consistency. However, in a stroke of genius on the part of CNN and Digg, the public was given an opportunity to provide the questions.

To be sure, it was a courageous attempt by Pelosi to placate the masses. And it was risky. Risky, because her answers would be subject to scrutiny to which she is unaccustomed to receiving by the mainstream press.

For example, Pelosi bristled at the notion that Congress under her direction has been lackluster, incompetent, perhaps even inept. She cited time after time that Congress has fought (and lost) battles with the president. She blamed those failures on the Senate and House Republicans. She also reiterated a number of times that the ONLY way Congress can win its battles with the White House is to get Barack Obama elected.

And then she admitted the most important defeat of her career, the failure to bring the troops home from Iraq and end that war. That admission is MONUMENTAL, for it is the sole solitary reason the Democrats were swept into office with such vigor and hope. It was the fulcrum upon which balanced the hopes and dreams of many millions in America. And Nancy Pelosi admitted that she and her fellow Democrats had failed.

But there’s more to it than mere failure. So MUCH more. Watch Nancy do her song and dance and then discover the secret she never revealed in Digg’s exclusive online interview with the Mouse Speaker.

What Pelosi failed to reveal was that she and House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers have collaborated as a team to ensure that the president and vice president will not be impeached as long as she is Mouse Speaker. Her commitment is so strong, she brazenly bandied about the fact that “impeachment is off the table” even before she took over as Mouse Speaker.

True to her word, Pelosi has prevented the very thing that would have ended the war in Iraq. Despite her platitudes of party loyalty and presumptuous politics, her fellow members of Congress, led by Dennis Kucinich, have done all they can to bring forth truth and justice in the form of impeachment articles, investigations and media coverage. Pelosi and Conyers, on the other hand, have done all they can to defeat the rising tide of exposure and tamp down any talk or possible widespread media coverage of the impeachment process, which continues despite Pelosi and Conyer’s attempts to keep it quiet.

Even the Senate Intelligence Committee’s conclusions after a 5-year investigation could not motivate outrage from Pelosi and Conyers. Neither have taken to the podium to stan dbeside Kucinich and company to denounce this president. Neither have recognized the death sentence both have enabled for so many in Iraq and Afghanistan with each day that passes.

The American people have spoken in numerous ways to this Congress. The public has demonstrated by the millions. It has shown in numerous consistent poll results its displeasure with this administration and this so-called “war on terror.” The public has conducted its own investigations, formed its own organizations, written numerous books and even sought to create its own media to bring forward the truth that cannot penetrate the wall of influence that surrounds the public and is controlled by the mainstream media.

Still, despite all of the efforts of so many for so long, Pelosi has managed to carve out a single win, though she admits to a long list of losing battles. That single win has been against the American people. She and Conyers have prevented us from impeaching and removing our Commander in Chief and his vice president, both of whom are culpable in the abuse of our military … and perhaps guilty of the injuriy and deaths of more than one million people.

For shame, Ms. Pelosi. For shame, Mr. Conyers.

Leave a comment »

If you’re ever in a fight with Congress … hire a lame duck

July 17, 2008 · Filed under Bush v Congress · Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today, Congress was again crushed by its long-time foe. Its attempts to get to the bottom of the CIA leak that outed Valerie Plame, sunk “Scooter” (a.k.a. Fall Guy) Libby and pointed to Vice President Dick Cheney, failed.

On July 12, 2008 the president dismissed congressional claims to information as old news. He said:

“It’s run its course. Now we’re going to move on.”

Congress wasn’t satisfied. And so today the White House invoked the trump card, EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, which ostensibly means that one white house can override two houses of any size.

So now, for the umpteenth time, the undisputed champion of the Washington Mall is (drum roll please) President George “Lame Duck” Bush!

Of course, this fight has been brewing for a while. And Congress has caved every round. Consider November 1, 2007 when Congress refused to approve Bush appointee Michael Mukasey as Attorney General. The Associated Press chronicled Bush’s response:

Bush accused Congress of stalling important pieces of the fight to prevent new terrorist attacks by: dragging out and possibly jeopardizing confirmation of Michael Mukasey as attorney general, a key part of his national security team; failing to act on a bill governing eavesdropping on terrorist suspects; and moving too slowly to approve spending measures for the Iraq war, Pentagon and veterans programs.

Bush took a tough stand by adding that if Congress failed to approve Mukasey, “That would guarantee that America would have no attorney general during this time of war.” Congress, of course, approved Mukasey. It also approved war funding, as it has every year, and recently has provided immunity for telecommunications companies that have cooperated with the Bush administration’s illegal domestic spying.

Today, it is Mukasey who is a stalwart defender of the White House.

Consider also the battle between Congress and the White House when House members subpoenaed White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and White House Counsel Harriet Meiers to testify regarding their knowledge of the firings (in 2006) of federal prosecutors. Bush told them to simply ignore Congress. They did. That enraged Nancy Pelosi, who demanded the lame Mukasey to do something. She wrote in a letter to Mukasey:

“Surely, your department would not tolerate that type of action if the witness were subpoenaed to a federal grand jury. Short of a formal assertion of executive privilege, which cannot be made in this case, there is no authority that permits a president to advise anyone to ignore a duly issued congressional subpoena for documents.”

Of course, Bush invoked executive privilege. And Mukasey did nothing.

The House voted 223-32 to hold Bolten and Meiers in contempt on March 14, 2008. Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla) said:

“No one is immune from accountability and the rule of law, not Harriet Miers or Josh Bolten, and especially not President Bush or Vice President Cheney.”

Of course, those were merely empty words spewed by losers. Such false bravado fell on deaf ears at the champion’s Oval Office. The White House told the press that the Justice Department would not ask the U.S. Attorney to pursue House contempt charges. (Note that the White House is speaking to the press on behalf of the Justice Department — presumably a separate branch of government created for balance).

The White House did, however, have some words of its own for Congress. Spokeswoman Dana Perino issued a statement:

“This action is unprecedented, and it is outrageous. It is astonishing and deeply troubling that after months of delay on passing a bill that will help our intelligence professionals monitor foreign terrorists who want to kill Americans, the House has instead turned its attention to the silly, pointless, and unjust act of approving these contempt resolutions. If Democrats bring suit to press the contempt charges they will be met with opposition at the courthouse door and at every step of the way.”

If one were watching this fight in successive rounds, rather than over months and years, it would be crystal clear who is winning. It would also be quite clear who to believe when words are exchanged. The White House has every intention of cutting Congress off at its knees. It has no intention of cooperating with any congressional subpoena, contempt charge, investigation or any demands made by the people’s representatives.

Conversely, Congress, which voted (251-166) on June 11, 2008 to send 35 articles of impeachment to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration, has no intention of impeaching Bush or representing the tens of millions of Americans who oppose the war, oppose Bush economic policies and want a change in the Commander in Chief immediately.

The media, which is beset with downsizing, consolidations, dismissals of valuable newsroom staff and a host of related problems that have severely impacted its ability to be the careful government watchdog it was commissioned to be by the Constitution, quietly ushered Rep. Dennis Kucinch’s (D-OH) impeachment attempt into the trash heap of interior page briefs that seldom ever make it to the spotlight. It was the media that immediately dismissed Kucinich before Congress had a chance to.

And it was the media that laid claim to the notion that 251 members of the House voting in FAVOR of articles of impeachment was not worthy to write a story about nor place on the front page. The House Judiciary Committee apparently has the job of killing the impeachment process if it doesn’t suit the will of the Democratic leaders.

The will of the American people be damned.

But don’t worry. The rest of this year, and likely well into the next, Congress will get a much-deserved ass whuppin’ by that lame duck in the White House. And while House leaders sit on their hands and do nothing except the bidding of Bush, the American people are starting to wake up and join the fight.

The Democrats had better wake up as well, or come November they may find themselves getting pushed out of the ring by the same folks who put them there … the American people.

Of course, if you ever have need of going into battle against Congress, you can’t go wrong by teaming up with Dubya. And don’t forget his dad was once the head of the CIA (HELLO!) and in the White House for 12 years.

Leave a comment »

Barack, Michelle, the elephant and The New Yorker’s ass

July 15, 2008 · Filed under barack obama · Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

While posing as a friend, you pushed Barack and Michelle together back into the pit of propaganda out of which they climbed.

Well, the New Yorker finally bit off a bit more than it could chew. Or did it?

Satire is the label pinned on the front cover of the July 21 edition of the infamous left-leaning magazine that caters to the ultra left elitist crowd. That satire has created a furor across the country … and likely a ton of cash for The New Yorker magazine.

Hmmm … satire, huh? This is what happens when folks hide their hostility behind a facade of humor. It’s called satire. And those who are targeted by it are expected to accept it quietly or find themselves targeted by further lampooning coupled with a huge dose of harsh criticism.

It’s all fair game, we are told. Barack Obama is a presidential candidate. He has been the target of vicious rumors associating him with “terrorists” — since his name and his background provide fodder for paving the path to “radical Islam” for those completely ignorant of who this man really is.

Obama has also been criticized for being un-American, thus the flag burning in the fireplace. He has been jabbed for his fist-bump with his wife, Michelle. And the list goes on. The cartoonist did well in presenting those images in this now-infamous lampoon on the upcoming cover of The New Yorker.

The editors blamed it all on the elephant in the room. You know, those Republicans. And much worse, those conservative Republicans. Those are the ones who have such disdain for Obama that all of those hostile images depicted in the cover of a liberal-leaning magazine were conjured again to poke fun at them.

“Is this the woman you want as First Lady?” That’s the question you may as well have put as a caption under her caricature on your cover.

The reality is that this malicious attempt to create controversy to sell magazines wasn’t the brainchild of conservatives. No, this was the hostility of the left, which loves to pretend it is such a friend to progressive politics, while simultaneously producing the jolt that may actually be intended to shake America out of its love affair with the Obamas.

Those who love Obama, of course, are primarily Democrats. Yep, The New Yorker really showed its political ass on this cover. And given its readership, who exactly do the folks at The New Yorker think they are fooling with the plausible deniability hidden in the word “satire?”

The satire ceased when Michelle was depicted as a presumed “militant” Angela Davis, complete with ammo and a military assault rifle. Michelle doesn’t wear an afro, Mr. and Mrs. New Yorker. And every one of your high-intellect, elitist left-wing readers understand the fear-mongering intended by portraying her with an afro, ammo, camouflage and boots.

Yep, we know that white America (many, but not all, conservatives and liberals alike) have long-held fears of blacks getting “out of control.” White America has had eugenics experiments, legal controls, executive policies, behind-doors unwritten codes and even illegal and unethical medical experiments … all with the idea that blacks must be held in check.

An angry black man is America’s worst nightmare. Well, white America’s anyway.

But if Barack can’t be protrayed as an angry black man (“He speaks so well, so eloquently and so smoothly … and he’s so charming”) then it’s time to pull out the Ace of Spades. Make Michelle the angry “B—-.”

Oh no!

Hearken back to the 60s and 70s. Images of righteous indignation embodied in the persona of an angry Angela Davis. Fear spreads across America as the Civil Rights Movement has taken root and grown. Now, today, in 21st-century America, that seed has blossomed into an opportunity for a black woman to become First Lady. Oh shockers!

Thanks for exposing the disdain for the Obamas that exists up there in your ivory offices. Now, we can clearly see the display of your progressive asses through the window of your high-brow hypocrisy.

While so-called progressives were trying to figure out a way to elevate Hillary over Barack, and dreaming of a First Man, they never considered the notion of a black woman running the White House. Say it isn’t so!

Well, thanks to The New Yorker, elitist white liberals have been unceremoniously reminded that unchecked runaway support for Barack will also result in Michelle changing the drapes and furniture, not to mention hosting some terrific parties at the White House.

That New Yorker cover doesn’t scare Republicans. And it doesn’t much achieve the supposed goal of satire, as much as the editors would like me to believe that excuse. However, it did smack a homerun in the field of producing fear in the minds of many so-called liberals and progressives in the Democratic Party. Those disappointed donkeys who recently proclaimed they would rather commit political suicide (even vote for McCain) than to see Barack and Michelle moving into the really BIG house.

We can’t have such an image in our WHITE house! An angry, militant afro-wearing black woman with her hand on her hip, neck gyrating and handing out pound to visitors in the foyer will never do.

Mr. and Mrs. New Yorker, I know you want to call our attention to the elephant in the room. Unfortunately, I can’t see anything except your own despicable ass that you spread across the cover. This Obama-nation was your concocted idea — your creative chaos. And it wasn’t meant to lampoon, but rather lambaste. You should be ashamed of yourselves up there in your high and mighty white tower, looking down your noses at the unwashed masses — of which many will likely swallow the swill you’ve swirled.

Well, count me as one who sees through your transparent attempt to revive the numerous attempts to derail Obama’s presidential aspirations. Sure, you can blame those initial attacks on Obama’s political enemies. But your sinister genius is exposed. While posing as a friend, you pushed Barack and Michelle together back into the pit of propaganda out of which they climbed.

And to add insult to injury, along with mustering malicious and menacing mania, you did something else the right-wingers did not do — you targeted Michelle in an effort to cast aspersions upon her image as First Lady.

“Is this the woman you want as First Lady?” That’s the question you may as well have put as a caption under her caricature on your cover.

Thanks for exposing the disdain for the Obamas that exists up there in your ivory offices. Now, we can clearly see the display of your progressive asses through the window of your high-brow hypocrisy.

Leave a comment »

I see dead people

July 13, 2008 · Filed under Introduction · Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I have long tried to find an underlying theme that encapsulates a permanent perspective I have that permeates most everything I write. It came to me this morning. And so today I begin an online journey to address issues in American society and the rest of the world from the point of view of truth.

The truth is that we are a lost society and a lost world. The problem is that we refuse to see that.

As a former engineer, I recall the basic element in problem-solving equations: First identify the problem. We don’t like to do that in America. Looking at problems is often deemed too pessimistic. We would rather offer a combined glance at the problem together with a full glare upon some optimistic outlook. Focusing on problems doesn’t help resolve anything, we say, and it makes us feel bad.

But the problems are too numerous to ignore. And we see evidence of them growing around us daily. We see: violence in epidemic proportions, drug and alcohol addiction, child abandonment, family dissolution, widespread failure of the public education system, government malfeasance and abuse of power, America’s covert and overt military and political operations subverting the sovereignty of many nations around the globe, and we see the church established by Jesus Christ involved in an adulterous relationship with the world and its governments.

In short, we see dead people walking in the dark … pretending to be well-informed and well-adjusted, without need of saving grace much less a gracious Savior.

By identifying the problems in specific terms, we can come to a realization of the solution. Overall, the answer is we are in need of a Savior, since we cannot save ourselves from certain doom. In the short run, that Savior has given us insight and understanding into the problems we experience day to day — from marriage and family problems to societal situations. Unfortunately, many still lack the ability to see or hear. And that’s the reason for this blog.

I will tackle problems of a wide variety: national and international news issues, relationships, marital issues, children & family, education, war, religion and politics. In addressing the problems I see, I will offer some insight based upon my perspective. I invite you to do the same in response.

Beware that in my underlying theme — I see dead people — there is hope. You see, God sees dead people too. That’s why He sent His Son to save us. Save us from what, you might ask? Our own sinful nature, which convicts us. Jesus is the saving grace that offers us the gift of life in the face of a death sentence. And what awaits us beyond that is so horrific that Jesus was willing to offer Himself as an innocent sacrifice to save us from such damnation.

Of course, there will be those who think they have done such good in this world that in the Day of Judgment, they will be able to point to their deeds and proclaim that they have done well. Jesus has already warned us that such an approach will be met with a dismissal.

Today, we see evidence of those who speak of their charitable giving, their efforts to uplift the poor and their service to the community. While those are good things we need to do, some of those same people also help support liars, thieves and murderers who use lofty political positions to project their power and force their will upon others. America herself proclaims to be the greatest nation on earth, ignoring the warning that whoever exalts himself will be lowered and whoever considers himself the greatest is considered the least in heaven.

The blood of millions is on our hands. As Americans, we have the power to hold our leaders accountable. We have the authority to change our government if it fails to reflect what we, the people, desire. Therefore, when our government undermines and overthrows other governments, when it murders innocent people, secretly kidnaps, imprisons and tortures, who do we charge with blame? How do we escape the shame and guilt of allowing our government to kill hundreds of thousands, force millions to flee and cause untold chaos and havoc over many years while we complain of high gas prices?

Who will accept our excuse of ignorance when the evidence of what our government does is all around, yet willingly ignored? How will we answer when we are asked why we failed to question the liars and dig deep for the truth?

The business of life distracts us and keeps us from discovering the truths hidden beneath piles of propaganda. But my spirit compels me to serve Christ by sharing the focus and insight on the truth that He has provided me. This I will do in my blog.

I pray that you will join me in this quest to shine the light of truth upon the persuasive pervasiveness of evil, in order that the dead may know there is a beacon of light shining in the darkness for all to see. No, that light doesn’t emanate from America. It is the glory of Jesus Christ.

Leave a comment »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.