has there not been any court challenges to the signing statements doctrine?

Surely someone somewhere, even a member of congress like Kuchinich or Feingold, has a standing to sue Bush for selectively disregarding laws or sections thereof?

And surely there is ample precedence to strike down the practice of signing statements as the line item veto that they basically are?

"...who have not expressed such admiration for a media figure since Judy Gordon's departure"

The GOP shouldn't even call themselves Christians - their philosophy is closer to that of the Pharisees.

Could Sen Rockefeller's enthusiasm for telecomms retroactive immunity have anything to do with the following organizations being among his top contributors list for 2006?

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00001685&cycle=2006

JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-WV)

Top Contributors

1 Kirkpatrick & Lockhart $21,500

2 Delta Airlines $20,550

3 PepsiCo Inc $19,000

4 Information Manufacturing Corp $18,000

5 AT&T Inc $16,000

5 National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $16,000

7 Jackson & Kelly $15,500

8 American Assn for Justice $15,000

9 BellSouth Corp $14,900

10 Skadden, Arps et al $14,750

11 Bowles, Rice et al $14,600

12 Baron & Budd $14,000

13 Ernst & Young $13,550

14 Northwest Airlines $13,500

15 American Hospital Assn $13,450

16 Verizon Communications $13,000

17 AFLAC Inc $12,750

18 Air Line Pilots Assn $12,500

18 American Health Care Assn $12,500

20 General Electric $12,000

20 UAL Corp $12,000

20 United Mine Workers $12,000

Sold out by Senator John D. Rockefeller. Probably has a chunk of his billions invested in AT&T and can't stand taking the stock price hit: "What would Mater say?"

More simple than that: campaign contributions.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00001685&cycle=2006

Four of his top twenty contributors were telco related. AT&T number 5 on the list.

The fact that Bush is pressing so hard for this immunity is precisely why it needs to be blocked. The telco lawsuits are the thread that can unravel the whole sweater, and the Bush camp knows this all too well.

At the very least we need to see Messrs Nacchio and Klein testify before Congress, to get on the record that:

a) The Bush Administration has been illegally spying on ALL Americans

b) That this began BEFORE 9/11

c) That a) was of no use in preventing the events in b)

...Was enough to impeach Clinton.

When oh when are we going to see the Democrats enforce some accountability?

Interesting point about the stock dumping campaign, not fully convinced however as the last few days' volumes aren't really anything above normal.

I would guess that the drop has more to do with the worsening economic outlook - media stocks tend to be quite sensitive as corporate advertising budgets are usually the first thing to be cut. That and the market has taken a dim view of Murdoch handing the reins to junior.

Not that I wouldn't love to see the campaign gain traction however - Rupert Murdoch is a businessman first and foremost and will much more likely respond to actions such as this.

I realise I'm late to this post, but if anyone is still reading, the coverage of the 5 year anniversary here in the UK has been rather good; see Channel 4 for example:

http://www.channel4.com/news/fight_for_iraq/happy_birthday_iraq

Cheers,

Could you imagine a report such as this on any US station, let alone a major network? (Link also at sig)

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1529573111?bclid=17197623001&bctid=17800997001

The reporter's commentary at the end is the bit to watch.

Cheers,