Friday, 4/9/10, Public Square

13 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

13 responses to “Friday, 4/9/10, Public Square

  1. Once again Kansas makes the news and once again it’s in the worst way possible.

    “Protesters From Kansas Take Aim at Miners

    MONTCOAL W.V. — Protesters from Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan., headed to the Upper Big Branch mine Thursday morning to convey the message that the explosion there that left 25 miners dead was a result of e-mail messages allegedly sent from West Virginia threatening the Church and its publisher, according to a statement from the Church.”

    continue reading —

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/09/us/09westboro.html

    • wicked

      So if someone from, say, Oklahoma sends me an email stating that I’m a raving maniac, I can get headlines in the paper that anyone dying in Oklahoma is God’s wrath for ??????

      The man is insane. If “God” has any wrath at all, “He” should smite the filthy mouth of this fake preacher who hides behind a church so he can cause pain and suffering to others.

  2. tosmarttobegop

    There has been mention of the use of this tragic thing being used to farther a Political agenda.

    As we see now with the Phelps.

  3. Bush ‘Knew Gitmo Prisoners Were Innocent’

    Hundreds of innocent men were imprisoned at Guantánamo Bay, and George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld covered it up so that the news couldn’t derail the war in Iraq and the war on terror, The Times of London reports. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, the top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell, levied these charges in a signed declaration filed to support a Gitmo detainee’s lawsuit. Most of his criticism was for the former vice president and secretary of Defense. Wilkinson wrote that Cheney and Rumsfeld knew that most of the 742 detainees initially sent to Guantánamo were innocent but thought it was “politically impossible to release them” because then “the detention efforts would be revealed as the incredibly confused operation that they were.” Wilkerson also said that Cheney “had absolutely no concern that the vast majority of Guantánamo detainees were innocent… If hundreds of innocent individuals had to suffer in order to detain a handful of hardcore terrorists, so be it.” Wilkinson is the first senior member of the Bush administration to make such allegations. A spokesman for Bush declined to comment.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7092435.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=2015164

    • Zippy

      The only surprising thing about this revelation is that is took so long to hit print.

      They’d love blame it on incompetence now–and there was plenty of that–but ever heard of “plausible deniability.”

      The overarching purpose was to restructure the law, for everyone, under the principle of the Unitary Executive. But the idea of capture a 100 rather than let 1 go free–get those boonga-boonga towelheads–was as stupid as it appeared.

      But these are same people who argue–continually–that abiding the Bill of Rights in law enforcement is “giving rights to criminals.” That is–of course–not even close to correct, unless one believes that everyone who is subject to law enforcement scrutiny is a criminal.

      Or that we have principles for well-established reasons, hashed out over centuries of legal precedents (even if those precedents are occasionally really dumb).

      Guilty-until-proven-innocent-with-no-review-and-“some”–evidence was the “standard.”

  4. indypendent

    Republicans get so mad when I remind them that all those extra powers that they allowed Bush and Cheney to give themselves are now in the hands of their most-hated President Obama.

    That’s when I usually get the ‘but Bush was doing what was right for our country’.

    Yeah, right. That’s when I just let out a big laugh and say – ‘oh, sure’.

    I wonder what color the sun is in Republican Land?

  5. Look what we have to look forward to! Another ‘contract on america’!! Do they have nothing new in their heads? Can any group of people be so backwards?

    ———

    Gingrich Pledges Government Shutdown If GOP Wins Back House And Senate

    On Wednesday night, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told Sean Hannity that he’s been tasked by the House Republican leadership to “to organize an effort over the next four or five months to develop a [new] compact or contract [with America].” On previous occasions, Gingrich has made clear that a staple of that new contract with will be to repeal health care reform.

    In a speech last night at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, Gingrich delivered an address that was touted to the press as a strategy for how the GOP can become “the party of Yes.” Instead, Gingrich –- the author of a forthcoming book titled To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine — explained his strategy of obstruction in further detail.

    Since more Republicans are conceding the full repeal of health reform is unlikely to occur on President Obama’s watch, Gingrich offered a two-tiered approach that is becoming increasingly popular among conservatives:

    Here’s my promise: … When we win control of the House and Senate this fall, Stage One of the end of Obamaism will be a new Republican Congress in January that simply refuses to fund any of the radical efforts. […]

    Once upon a time, I used to be Speaker of the House and I actually understand the legislative process. And the truth is, under our Constitution, the Congress doesn’t have to pass the money. If EPA gets not budget, it can’t enforce cap-and-trade. […]

    So Stage One of Obamaism being gone is to simply win this fall and not fund it for two years. Stage Two is…to ensure Obama joins Jimmy Carter in the tradition of one-party presidents (sic). And, that in that context, that we be prepared to commit that a Republican President and a Republican Congress in February and March of 2013 will repeal every radical bill passed by this machine.

    Gingrich’s remarks were met with roars of approval from the right-wing crowd. Watch it:

    http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/09/gingrich-shutdown-2-0/

  6. From New Media Director Natalie Foster:

    Ever wanted a quick explanation of how health reform will benefit your and your community, to share with friends and family?

    We made this one-of-a-kind customized video to do just that. Watch now.

    http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/benefitsofreform

  7. tosmarttobegop

    I broke the news at the breakfast of my intention to declare Independent after the Primary.
    That XXX and I were going to form our own party, got a frown at that.

    It has not been all that easy a decision, but everyday it seems the Republican party is sinking deeper and deeper and father away from thinking and just turning into a hard ideology driven party of delusional fascists.

    There is really no choice of a Democratic Kansas Senate win, Moran is not all that great but would be better then Tiahrt. Jerry Moran is trying to be like McCain in courting the Conservatives but not to the same extent as McCain.

    Like McCain it is a uphill battle as neither is known or thought to be a real Con.
    But the real majority of either moderate Republicans or Independents would not vote for a hard liner.
    It is the center where the votes are.

    • Yes, our next senator from Kansas will be another Republican and the race will be decided at the primary level between Moran and Tiahrt. Sometimes I realize that Moran is potentially more dangerous than Tiahrt because he has a brain and is a bit sneaky. Tiahrt is too stupid to breathe without reminders and is a total follower, incapable of an independent thought or idea. That probably makes him safer, but I am tired of stupid politicians. Give me someone capable of thinking, of any political persuasion, over the idiots. My vote in the primary will go to Moran.

      And the best part of this race is that one of these men takes the other out of politics. That’s no small treat! 😉 I’ll accept that as a gift to all Kansans.

  8. “But the real majority of either moderate Republicans or Independents would not vote for a hard liner.
    It is the center where the votes are.”

    I see this fact as the Republicans biggest challenge. At the national level anyone who pleases the base won’t draw votes from Independents or Moderates. Anyone who might draw those votes won’t be selected in the primaries.

    Can you imagine anyone outside the hard-core base voting for a Palin or a Bachmann or … ?

    Yeah, they won’t!

  9. tosmarttobegop

    Either Palin or Bachman being chosen could be the ole its over when the fat lady sings!
    It would be the absolute sign that the Republican party is over and done with.

    • If they were stupid enough to put either of those two on a national ticket, I would sing — loudly and happily. 😉