Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has surrendered to police in London on suspicions of sex crimes in Sweden. An extradition hearing is scheduled for later today, which Assange’s lawyers have vowed to fight.
Hearing the Republicans pound their chests as the anti-earmark crusaders has me laughing. I decided it was time to look for some historical data on earmarks, which ended up validating my suspicions.
First thing you will notice is that the source of this chart is from the very conservative Heritage Foundation, using data from the also very conservative Citizens Against Government Waste and Taxpayers for Common Sense. I wonder if these two groups recognize what I have in the data? Look at the biggest years of earmark spending and the number of earmark bills. The two biggest years just so happen to be years that the Republican Party controlled Congress.
But apparently these groups didn’t even look at their own charts. Read the top part; “Despite pledges from President Obama and congressional leaders to curtail earmark spending, the practice has continued at previous levels”. While the number of earmarks is still high (though much less than in 2005), the cost of these projects have seen a pretty substantial drop.
This makes this case that much more disturbing:
The man who was arrested with two guns and hundreds of rounds of ammunition near the Capitol during President Barack Obama's health care speech in September had been an employee of the George W. Bush White House. The arrest of the man, Joshua Bowman, was widely reported at the time, but the news stories made no mention of his previous employment: For several years he worked in the Executive Office of the President, dealing with tech issues, including White House emails, his lawyer, George Braun, tells Mother Jones.
On the night of September 9, Bowman was on his way to meet Braun, a Bush administration political appointee, at the National Republican Club on First Street, SE when he was stopped by Capitol Police around 7:45 p.m.—minutes before Obama was scheduled to deliver a major address to Congress pushing his health care initiative. Bowman had driven up to a security checkpoint and told officers he wanted to park, but his lack of a permit for the area aroused their suspicions, and they asked to search his car.
Seriously – shouldn’t someone who worked in the White House know better? I know this was an honest mistake on Braun’s part, but still – a little common sense please?
The saga of Tiger Woods keeps getting more interesting:
A Florida highway patrol request for blood tests of Tiger Woods the morning of his accident was denied. The development comes with suspicions he was driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs.
I bet the judge who refused this subpoena was worried about some kind of “fame outrage”.
Welcome back to the sixties:
No bombs were thrown into the party, but just after 3 a.m. several miles away, someone crept into a clearing in the woods and set fire to the predominantly black Macedonia Church of God in Christ, reducing it to a skeleton of charred metal and wood.
Investigators have yet to determine why the church was targeted, but they say the timing, just hours after Barack Obama broke the highest racial barrier in politics, raised suspicions that it was a hate crime. It touched off a raw fear that has lurked just below the surface in many black communities, that Obama's breakthrough success would trigger a backlash against blacks.
Expect sickness like this to continue for the next four years. Hopefully we can start flushing out the haters.
Should this organization really have such an influence in our politics?
The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms.
Backed by the Justice Department, the measure would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales, licenses or permits to terror suspects.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., "would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere 'suspicions' of a terrorist threat."
We get called "terrorist sympathizers" for complaining about torture and the removal of Habeas. What the hell is this? These people think those suspects should have guns (and yes - they are suspects). How can the Republicans defend this? So you don't get a right to a speedy trial, yet you do get the right to a gun? I missed the part where one constitutional right trumps the other.
I think the Republicans should be asked if they will denounce this stance by the NRA. If the ACLU went out and said that terrorism suspects had a right to bear arms, then they would be branded as terrorists themselves. Something is very wrong here.
Like I said earlier, there is more to this than meets the eye. Now ABC has confirmed my suspicions.
A Deibold insider who gave an exclusive report to
Brad Friedman of BradBlog
earlier this year has now spoken to
Raw Story. The following is some excerpts from the article but I encourage
you to visit
Raw Story and read the article in full.
The Diebold insider, who took on the appellation ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œDieb-ThroatÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â in an
interview with voting rights advocate Brad Friedman (BradBlog.com), was once
a staunch supporter of electronic votingÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s potential to produce more
accurate results than punch cards.
But the company insider became disillusioned after witnessing repeated
efforts by Diebold to evade meeting legal requirements or implementing
appropriate security measures, putting corporate interests ahead of the
interests of voters.
Previous revelations from the whistleblower have included evidence that
DieboldÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s upper management and top government officials knew of backdoor
software in DieboldÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s central tabulator before the 2004 election, but
ignored urgent warningsÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Âsuch as a Homeland Security alert posted on the
The insider harbors suspicions that Diebold may be involved in tampering
with elections through its army of employees and independent contractors.
The 2002 gubernatorial election in Georgia raised serious red flags, the
OH this is Bush's lucky day. Not only is there a hurricane beating down on
Florida leaving death and destruction in its path, but news has come out of
Aruba about the Natalee Holloway case.
The Kalpoe brothers have been arrested again on suspicions that they acted
together in covering up the rape and murder of Natalee. This will certainly give
FOX a ratings boost as they can station more reporters in Aruba to get the "fair
and balanced" look into the story.
This story is now three months old and still dominates the network news. All
they need now is another star getting arrested and Bush will get his distraction
tri-fecta and can sneak out news that is negative to the administration. Way to
get control back on the media George!
For those of you who did not have the displeasure of reading the coverage the
Washington Post gave to the DSM hearing on Thursday, here is the
link. This was a total trash piece and sadly was the only coverage the
Washington Post gave to this important hearing. Below is a copy of the letter I
have sent to the Washington Post, and I encourage all of you to do the same. At
the end of this post is the email addresses to Dana Milbank, who wrote the
article and also Michael Abramowitz who is the national editor. The fact that
this article was not only in bad taste but also filled with lies is a disgrace
to the people of this country, the members who attended this hearing, the
witnesses and most importantly the families of the fallen soldiers who took the
time to attend. Please voice your opinion of how you feel regarding this letter.
I was highly upset when I read the coverage that a once great newspaper
gave to the hearing on the Downing Street Memo. Dana MilbankÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s portrayal of
the actual meeting would leave one to wonder if he was even present for it, or
did he get his reporting from Bill OÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢Reilly.