I did not fly North with the wild goose. If I'm not dodging falling acorns in the woods, I'm lost in the potato patch with bugs and bunnies.

Fir the first time in 30- years, breaking news about a crumbling economy and a corrupt Bank Reak Estate Industry. O, poor fanny may. My-0-mammy. Oh day-o-me.

O, Pedinska! I'll send a e-mail to damn barnicle smelling bambage. Okay. I was gonna send the farm CSA mail address, but the NSA already charges Maryland residents in the Fake Global Geopolitical Oil-Fiasco ERA-72% higer utility rates for snooping on people like _____`.`~.~?

Ya' never know for certain anything, for sure. Tell one person, Pedenska,

Tell the world.

I'll get to bambage this eve?

Just pathetic. The dems should have added an amendment to that 'sense' bill celebrating the constitution and free political speech, *then* made the GOP vote on that. But, because the dems are simply the most pathetic bunch of whipped losers I've ever seen, they got right in line and cast their stupid, vapid, tool-like votes against their own ferkin base. Pathetic! Laugh-out-loud hilarious! Feel-good joke of the year!

that said, moveon should just ignore the whole carnival, just bring the heat. *Moveon* started this. No sense in crying about it now. By hindsight, I think they missed with the headline. Everyone is talking about that, rather than the message below the headline. The headline became the shiny object. But I'm not a moveon member, so what I think means absolutely nothing.

moveon should just ignore the whole carnival, just bring the heat. *Moveon* started this. No sense in crying about it now. By hindsight, I think they missed with the headline. Everyone is talking about that, rather than the message below the headline. The headline became the shiny object. But I'm not a moveon member, so what I think means absolutely nothing.

They seem to be the only ones bringing real heat right now, so more power to them. I agree the headline was a bit much, and I shared that with them. But if they happen to stub a toe while putting a boot up the backside of the administration, then so be it. Would have been better if they'd had a sub-header that read "as noted on conservative blogs across the 'intertubes'!" or some such, indicating the true origin of the name. That would've been a twofer, but that's just more hindsight. ;-)

I agree that it is weird that the Bush administration has gotten more of what it wanted since the Democrats took over in Congress last year. The most likely explanation is that when Democrats were in the minority, their strategy was to win support by simply opposing the Republican agenda, whatever it happened to be. Now that they are in power, their strategy is to curry favor with the White House in the hopes of not being blamed for anything that could go wrong. This suggests that whether in power or out, the Democrats have no principles and will do anything to maintain their privileged status within the establishment.

In his first inaugural address, Thomas Jefferson said:

"freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected . . . form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation . . . They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."

While I strongly believe that Congress can, and should, IMPEACH both President Bush, and Vice-President Cheney, I am grudgingly coming to terms with the idea that the "moment of error and alarm" that IS the Bush administration, will now last until January, 2009.

Until that time, I have a question that I would like to ask ALL of the Democratic presidential candidates: Will they, on their first day in office, repudiate ALL of the Constitutional excesses of the Bush administration, unambiguously promising NOT to engage in warrantless domestic surveillance; and, unambigously promising to restore habeas corpus.

I can't speak for anyone else, but, as for me, I WILL NOT support ANY candidate who does not promise to immediately "regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."

Greetings,

I want to make a small contribution to the continuing debate focused upon the President's powers and Congress's capitualtion whether through inaction or the passing of "Acts" or legislation.

In our republic, as confirmed by our Constitution as well as repeated Supreme Court Rulings, the Executive and the Congress lack any power to change the Constitution through decree. When ever one or the other presumes to do so, the Act, legislation, or Presidential Order is null and void upon application to the population at large. Any government agent or agency acting under the color of law is answerable to charges under Title 18.

It is a total fallacy to believe that Congress or the President has the power to disregard the Constitution. Any spying on the general population of America is still unlawful, whether Congress has passed a law or not. Understand, Congress and the President only have plenary power over U.S. territories. The 50 states of the Union, and their citizens, are outside of their jurisdiction.

This is pretty basic Constitutional law. I challenge anyone to argue otherwise. If they do, they simply do not know what they are talking about. All law is territorial. Try and disprove it.

Again, if the president, the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, where to spy upon a citizen of one of the fifty states, they would be breaking the law of the land. Searches and seizures without a warrent sworn before an oath-taking judge are still unlawful in our republic. Agents of the U.S. Government acting under the color of law are subject to prosecution under 18 USC Sections 241 & 242.