Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
She'll continue to lose football games to Harvard?
Maybe ehillesum is concerned about her ties to Skull and Bones.........oh, wait! No bone. Hmmm. Good thing she seems to have plenty of what it takes in her skull..... ;-}
I found this interesting information when I googled S & B:
Members are assigned nicknames. “Long Devil" is assigned to the tallest member; "Boaz" ... goes to any member who is a varsity football captain. Many of the chosen names are drawn from literature ("Hamlet," "Uncle Remus"), from religion and from myth. ... George H.W. Bush was "Magog," a name reserved for a member considered to have the most sexual experience. George W. Bush, unable to decide, was temporarily called "Temporary," and the name was never changed.[10]
Perhaps this was where Dubya picked up his propensity for bestowing nicknames.
Ms. Dawn Johnson sounds perfect and I think Leon might be OK, but the best news is Jane Harmon getting punked.
I must confess that a part of me agrees with this sentiment entirely.
Dawn Johnsen's appointment is clearly more significant than Jane Harman's snubbing. Still, for pure petty enjoyment value, the latter event wins easily.
If their behavior vis a vis-à-vis the Bush administration is any guide, Feinstein and Rockefeller are merely upset that they weren't "consulted" on the fact that they would be utterly disregarded before being utterly disregarded.
It's the decorum, you see. Being treated as irrelevant simply must come with the requisite antecedent formalities.
Knew I should have previewed that comment.
The thing that worried me earlier, prompted me to ask the question, and worries me anew with the reported distress of Feinstein and Rockefeller is getting Obama's appointments through the Senate confirmation process. Particularly, perhaps, if those appointments look good to Obama's "base."
I have little doubt that what looks good to me, will in no way look good to Feinstein and Rockefeller. And, I can't help but wonder how threatened some of our Senators might feel if they thought an appointment of Obama's might reveal something those fairly powerful Senators preferred remain hidden.
It ought to be hard for me to imagine that Democratic Senators would oppose Obama's appointment choices, but it's not.
I can't think of any better references for Panetta than the fact that [Feinstein and Rockefeller] might be opposed to him.
Took the words right out of my mouth. This appears to be Obama's real first challenge in bringing lawbreaking Dems to heel.
bystanderI wonder if it would be OK with Jebbie for you to send it to the e-mail on his blog? For me, that would be better, I think. I'll wait to see if Jebbie sees this. I really appreciate your help. :-)
I've already got it. I've been sitting on the damned thing for a few days. It's a PIA to read without printing it because it's printed in two columns. To read it, you have to continually scroll up to see the right column of each page.
Well, I do anyway. I can't read little ittsy bitsy letters anymore.
Americans Reject Fear Tactics
Monterey County Herald, March 9, 2008
By Leon E. Panetta (posted at the Panetta Institute website)
an excerpt:
"Even though we now know that there were intelligence officials who questioned the assertion, few leaders were willing to challenge this argument for war because they knew it might undermine public support for the president's decision to invade Iraq.
More recently, President Bush vetoed a law that would require the CIA and all the intelligence services to abide by the same rules on torture as contained in the U.S. Army Field Manual.
The president says the rules are too restrictive, implying that the use of some forms of torture just could help avoid another Sept. 11.
But all forms of torture have long been prohibited by American law and international treaties respected by Republican and Democratic presidents alike.
Our forefathers prohibited "cruel and unusual punishment" because that was how tyrants and despots ruled in the 1700s. They wanted an America that was better than that. Torture is illegal, immoral, dangerous and counterproductive. And yet, the president is using fear to trump the law.
The same rationale is used to justify eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without a warrant. The president has made clear that the failure of the Congress to pass this authority could jeopardize our security. Instead of trying to negotiate a compromise with Congress that would meet both our intelligence and privacy concerns, it is easier to threaten with fear."
Note especially--
"Instead of trying to negotiate a compromise with Congress that would meet both our intelligence and privacy concerns, it is easier to threaten with fear."
I'm equally encouraged by Panetta being DNI if what he says here about rejecting fear and following the rule of law as it pertains to American governess.
kudos--for going with principle.
Listening to Ms. Johnsen in the video, I don't see her being anyone's rubber stamp. She also has a clear vision of what the OLC should be, and a proper understanding of what went wrong in the Bush Administration.
That's the most encouraged I've been in quite a while.
I want to commend Glenn Greenwald for speaking about these issues, particularly the problems he has with Democrats and Republicans and their enabling illegal torture, wiretapping, invasions of other countries, and so forth. He does so in a way that takes into consideration the arguments that both his allies and his adversaries consider. He is thoughtful about the arguments in ways which journalists in the mainstream have only superficially done. I think he is able to do this because as a constitutional lawyer, he has an understanding about the issues that helps him understand what has gone on, and helps him make his case clearly.
I came home this afternoon from errands and discussions with friends about these issues and I was interested to see and hear what Glenn had added to his posts as updates. I just have to point out that he does a good job.
Last I looked, the last thread is at 102 pages and counting. Is that a record? Any "old timers" here have any idea?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
