Rep. Weiner: The "Republic Party"

(02/08/07)As previously noted, the factually and intellectually challenged "republic party" has a history of mispronouncing The Democratic Party as the "Democrat Party". Of course, we're talking about a "republic party" that supports intelligent design, attacking a country that didn't attack your own, and the countless other issues that proves the "republic party" is a cult of brain dead sheeple.

Today, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) repeatedly used the term "republic party" on the house floor. Kos and Hullabaloo noted Rep. Weiner's brilliant oration.

(02/10/07)Updated. Here is the video. Weiner is simply brilliant.

Rep Ackerman: Pentagon More Afraid of Gay People Than Terrorists

Rep. Gary Ackerman took on Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice yesterday during her testimony while discussing the State Department’s 2008 budget.

During the discussion, Rice claimed the State Department "repeatedly emphasized the importance of recruiting qualified language experts to work in the agency.” Ackerman in response brought up the 322+ language specialists with "'some skills in an important foreign language such as Arabic, Farsi and Korean' had been discharged from the military since the ban’s inception in 1993."

Ackerman then said the Pentagon “'seems more afraid of gay people than they are [of] terrorists,' and that if the terrorists were smart, 'they’d get a platoon of lesbians to chase us out of Baghdad.'”

Ackerman is one of the first Congressmen to call the Administration and the Pentagon out on this appalling decision-making, and did so with great wit. We need more Congressmen like Ackerman! (H/T to ThinkProgress - who also has the video of the exchance)

Rank Our U.S. Senators

From September 10, 2006 to July 10, 2007 readers at the New Political Review get to vote for their favorite Senator. The Senators will be ranked on the basis of four criteria: Integrity, honor, dignity and character. It's free, no registration required, so go vote!

Gay Marriage Ban Dropped

Sen. Wayne Allard (R-CO) and Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO), the two leading advocates of amending the US Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, "say they have no plans to make a third try to advance the proposal." "If we thought there was a decent chance to bring it to the floor for debate, I would, but with the new Congress, I’m not sure we will ever have that opportunity," Allard says.

Perhaps these two wing-nuts will now focus instead on other crucial and important legislation like deporting them darned gay, flag burning, illegal Mexicans who show their nipples on T.V.

House Democrats at 34 hours: 5 bills down and 1 to go

The 109th-do-nothing Congress is behind us and now the new and much improved (and motivated) Democratic-controlled 110th Congress is making progress. Five bills have been passed and one more is on tap as House Democrats sprint through their list of promises, not even in sight of the 100 hours set aside for that goal. From the AP:

About seven more hours ticked away Wednesday on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's 100-hour clock for passing each item on an agenda that Democrats told voters they would enact after sweeping to victory in November.

It has taken just over 34 hours to pass the first five bills (my emphasis), including a measure approved Wednesday to lower interest rates on some student loans.

The items passed so far would:

* make the government negotiate for lower Medicare prescription drug prices. It passed last Friday.

* expand federally funded stem cell research. It passed Jan. 11.

* raise the federal minimum wage. It passed Jan. 10.

* seek to bolster terrorism-fighting efforts. It passed Jan. 9.

* change rules governing ethics, lobbying and the budget. These changes were passed on Jan. 4-5.

GOP "Flip Flop" on the Filibuster

In 2005, Senate Republicans caused a raucus when Democrats attempted to filibuster several of President Bush's judicial nominees. Shortly after Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, William Rehenquist, passed away, former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, assuming Democrats would filibuster any appointment made by President Bush, labeled the use of the filibuster as a "formula for tyranny by the minority."

During the debacle, many Republicans agreed with Frist's decision to invoke the "nuclear option", including former Senators Rick Santorum and George Allen, as well current Senators Lamar Alexander, Thad Cochran, along with many others.

But how quickly things change when the Republicans are voted into the minority.

From The Washington Post:

"President Bush's decision to deploy 21,500 additional troops to Iraq drew fierce opposition Thursday from congressional Democrats, but the Senate's top Republican threatened a filibuster to block any legislation expressing disapproval of the plan."

Back when the debate to end the filibuster was raging, Democrats (including Harry Reid) made the point that this "nuclear option" would one day come back to bite them in the foot, had they gone through with it. Apparently, the entire debate was nothing more than rhetoric, since one of the first action's of the minority Republicans is to revert to using the filibuster to achieve their own agenda. Does this qualify as "tyranny by the minority?"

UPDATE: According to right-wing bloggers, McConnell has stated he fully expects the support of Holy Joe in the filibuster. So much for caucusing with the Democrats.

Bush Speak: Subtly Threatening War With Iran and Syria

In what was hailed as one of the most important speeches of his presidency, George Bush almost declared he'd be sending more troops to Iraq, announced a new bipartisan commission led by Senator Joe Lieberman, and almost declared war on Iran and Syria.

As was predicted, Bush did commit a further 21,500 troops to Iraq, while basically giving away his play book to the insurgents, detailing where these troops will be used, and the new command structure.

"The vast majority of them – five brigades – will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs."

Bush also announced a new bipartisan panel that will advise the administration, and act as a channel to the Congress. The most prominent Democrat on this panel? Holy Joe:

"Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror. This group will meet regularly with me and my Administration, and it will help strengthen our relationship with Congress."

Also, Bush continued to show that he is "The Decider", and backtracked on his promise to actually work with the new Congress:

"In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief Congress on our new strategy. If Members have improvements that can be made, we will make them. If circumstances change, we will adjust. Honorable people have different views, and they will voice their criticisms. It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny. And all involved have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely to succeed."

In what may have been the most odd moment of the speech, it appeared Bush virtually declared war on Iran and Syria:

"Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing – and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region."

The speech was mostly a rehashing of the same rhetoric we've heard for the past 4 years, with only a few slight differences.

There will be no bounce for Dubyah tomorrow, and this speech may have solidified his "lame duck" status.

Democrats Forcing Republicans to Go On Record Concerning Troop Surge

As we reported yesterday, only 36% of Americans support a troop surge in Iraq, while 61% are against it.

Now the Senate Democrats have a plan to make sure the American people know where their Representatives, particularly Republicans, stand on the issue too. From The New York Times:

"Democratic leaders said Tuesday that they intended to hold symbolic votes in the House and Senate on President Bush’s plan to send more troops to Baghdad, forcing Republicans to take a stand on the proposal and seeking to isolate the president politically over his handling of the war."

The vote will be held early next week.

This is politics at its best. Finally, the Democrats have the opportunity to put Republicans on the spot and make voters understand just where their Representative stands on important issues. This same tactic was used during last night's vote on the National Security bill (HR1) implementing 9/11 Commission recommendations. Imagine in 2008 Democrats being able to tell constituents that their Republican representative was against tighter screening at our ports.

The tables have turned, and thus far, Democrats are playing the game just right, while actually doing something that puts the American people first.

House of Representatives Passes Comprehensive Security Bill Implementing 9/11 Commission Recommendations

The House of Representatives has just passed a comprehensive national security bill implementing 9/11 Commission recommendations, by a vote of 299-128.

"Patterned on recommendations of the commission that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks, the far-reaching measure includes commitments for inspection of all cargo carried aboard passenger aircraft and on ships bound for the United States."

68 Republicans crossed party lines and voted with Democrats to pass the bill, with 8 Representatives not voting. You can see how your Representative voted here.

In-depth List of Positions on Iraq Troop Surge

The "liberal media" has been discussing the Bush/McCain doctrine of increasing troop levels much of this week, with Fox specifically claiming the support for said doctrine falls along party lines.

Unfortunately, this claim turns out to be false. Below, find a comprehensive list of positions the top politicians have staked out on escalation.

For
the Bush Administration
John McCain
Joe Lieberman
Mitch McConnell
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC)
Sen. Wayne Allard (R-CO)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX)
Sen. John Kyl (R-AZ)
Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-TX)


Against
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki
Oliver North
“Nearly All” troops on the ground
61% of Americans
No. 2 Gen in Iraq: Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno
Tony Blair
Democratic House/Senate Leadership (Pelosi, Reid, Hoyer)
Chuck Hagel (R – NE)
John Ensign – (R – NV)
Specter
Heather Wilson (R – NM)
Norm Coleman (R – MN)
Kit Bond (R – MO)
Sen. Gordon Smith (R – OR)
Susan Collins (R – ME)
Olympia Snowe (R – ME)
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO)
Rep. John Murtha (D-PA)
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT)
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA)
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA)
Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)
Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA)
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE)
Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) *
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
Gen. Abizaid
Gen. Casey
John Edwards
Wesley Clark
Ted Kennedy
Dennis Kucinich
Colin Powell
John Kerry
Russ Feingold
Tom Vilsack
Bill Richardson
Sen. John Warner (R-VA)
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS)

Reserving Judgment
John Ensign – (R – NV)
Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN)
Trent Lott (R – MS)
Rep. Adam Putnam (R-FL)
Sen. Saxby Chamblis (R-GA)
Sen. John Sununu (R-NH)
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
Rep. Bill Young (R-FL)
Rep. John McHugh (R-NY)
Rep. Peter King (R-NY)
Sen. John Tester (D-MT)
Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL)
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO)
Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO)
Chuck Grassley (R – IA)
John A. Boehner (R – OH)

* Levin is in favor of sending more troops as long as Bush agrees to begin withdrawing in 6 months.

61% of Americans Oppose "Surge"

In line with the good doctor's post just moments ago, it's important to note where American sentiment lies on the Bush/McCain/Lieberman strategy of escalation.

Democrats are not merely acting as obstructionists when they work to deny Bush the opportunity to sacrifice upwards of another 20,000 American soldiers lives. According to a USA Today/Gallup poll released today, only 36% of Americans are in favor of escalation, while a staggering 61% majority oppose this action.

This coincides closely with the sentiment of our troops on the ground. Right-wing commentator and usual Bush supporter, Oliver North noted just yesterday that "nearly all" US troops are opposed to the escalation as well.

Bush may not listen to the voice of the American people, but it is finally being heard loud and clear on the Capital.

Ted Kennedy (D-Mass) Introduces Bill Requiring Congressional Approval for President's Troop 'Surge'

From ABC News:

U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., laid down the gauntlet today, making the first formal effort to block President Bush's expected plan for a surge of American troops in Iraq with a bill that would block funding for the additional soldiers and offering clear comparisons to Vietnam.

Kennedy called Iraq a "quagmire" and drew repeated comparisons to Vietnam, a tactic that Democrats are likely to repeat in the coming months.

This is a brilliant maneuver coming 24 hours before Bush attempts to sell his latest Iraq "plan" to the American people. Democrats need to stay on the offensive and continue to out flank Bush and the GOP minority.

Updated (4:45 PM ET ) H/T to C&L for video:

Looks Like Bush is REALLY "Lawyering Up"

With the resignation of Supreme Court Just...er, White House Counsel Harriet Meyers, White House advsiors told President Bush he needed to "lawyer up" to face the newly elected Democractic Congress.

Looks like he took those words to heart. According to Time:

"In a signal that he could be open to working more closely with congressional Democrats rather than stonewalling, President Bush plans to name the widely respected Republican lawyer Fred F. Fielding as White House counsel this week..."
Hiring Fred F. Fielding really is the equivalent of bringing in the "big guns."

Also from the Time article:

"Fielding was Counsel to President Reagan from 1981 to 1986, deputy White House counsel from 1972 to 1974 and associate White House counsel from 1970 to 1972."

Sooooo, basically Bush is expecting the worst, and has brought in a lawyer that was involved in representing Ronald Reagan during the Iran Contra Affair, and Richard Nixon during Watergate. Sounds like "The Decider" is shaking in his Gucci cowboy boots.

Outside of Fielding's experience in other corrupt administrations, Fielding is a partner in Wiley Rein & Fielding, a law firm based in Washington DC that has had it's hand in helping the spread of fake news.

According to Sourcewatch:

"In October 2006, Wiley Rein & Fielding law and lobby firm filed an appeal with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), on behalf of the Radio-Television News Directors Association (RTNDA), asking the agency to halt its investigation of 77 television stations found to have aired video news releases (VNRs) without disclosure."

Sounds like Mr. Fielding will fit nicely into the current criminal administration. Welcome aboard.

Cargo Tests Positive for Explosives in Port of Miami

CNN is currently reporting that cargo in the Port of Miami has tested positive for C-4 Plastique. This comes just one day after 3 suspicious individuals were detained shortly at the very same port:

"Officials initially said that the three men were caught trying to slip past a security checkpoint in a cargo truck on Sunday and that the driver had said he was alone. Federal investigators and a bomb squad were called in, and authorities eventually determined the freight was harmless.

Even though Miami-Dade Police said the problem was a miscommunication, driver Amar Al Hadad, 28, was still charged with resisting an officer without violence, and his passengers, Hussain Al Hadad, 24, and Hassan El Sayed, 20, were charged with trespassing."

Most charges were subsequentlly dropped against the three.

One of the 9/11 Commission's largest suggestions was to increase funding for port security, which the GOP has consistently refused to do.

Thank god for the Democratically-controlled Congress:

"We'll go them one better on port security, where we have even tougher proposals to screen 100 percent of the containers long before they reach U.S. shores" - Nancy Pelosi, 12/2006.

Just one more check in the "Democrats were right" column.

Patrick Leahy to Introduce War Profiteering Prevention Act

I spent much of this year working with Brave New Films providing research assistance for "Iraq for Sale", and excellent film that shows exactly what the Bush Administration is allowing corporations and contactors to get away with in Iraq.

Throughout the research stage, one name continuously popped up - someone that was striving to make sure these contractors were held accountable for putting our soldiers in harm's way: Senator Patrick Leahy (D - VT). During the 109th Congress, Leahy attempted to introduce legislation to provide oversight and strict penalties for contractors in Iraq that are ripping off the American people, while hurting the troops. The Republican controlled Congress shot him down more than once.

With the Democratic majority taking over Congress last week, Patrick Leahy, now head of the Senate Judiciary Committee introduced the "War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2007":

"Many Democratic Senators joined Leahy in reintroducing a bill creating criminal penalties for war profiteers and cheats who would exploit taxpayer-funded efforts in Iraq and elsewhere around the world. The War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2007 builds on earlier efforts by Leahy, who is also a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, to crack down on this type of rampant fraud and abuse. It is similar to legislation Leahy introduced in 2003, that was subsequently passed by the Senate as part of an appropriations bill but later torpedoed by the White House and the House Republican leadership, which stripped out the Leahy provision."

According to a press release issued by Leahy, the bill will include the following provisions:

"§ Criminalizes war profiteering, which is defined as materially overvaluing any good or service with the specific intent to excessively profit from the war and relief or reconstruction activities

§ Statute would strengthen the tools available to federal prosecutors to combat war profiteering by providing clear authority for the Government to seek criminal penalties and to recover excessive profits for war profiteering overseas.

§ Prohibits any fraud against the United States, Iraq, or any other foreign country involving a contract for the provision of any goods or services in connection with a war, military action, or relief or reconstruction activities.

§ Subjects violators to up to 20 years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed the greater of $1,000,000 or twice the amount of any illegal gross profits, or both.

§ Prohibits making a false statement in any matter involving a contract for the provision of any goods or services in connection with a war, military action, or relief or reconstruction activities.

§ Subjects violators of this provision to up to 10 years imprisonment and a fine not to exceed the greater of $1,000,000, or twice the amount of any illegal gross profits, or both.

§ Creates extraterritorial jurisdiction over offenses committed overseas, and covers any person in the United States or abroad who violates its provisions."

After a year of reading stories about what these contractors did to our troops and our nation, it's an amazing feeling to finally see something done about it. Director Robert Greenwald and Brave New Films are owed a huge debt for getting this story out to the American people, and making it an issue everyone can understand and relate to.

As for Leahy, after his 2004 dust up with Vice President and Halliburton lover, Dick Cheney, he can finally respond back with the same phrase used by Cheney, "go fuck yourself!"

Song of the Day (Queen, 'We Are The Champions')

A dedication to the Democratic-controlled 110th Congress!

White House Surprised No One Questioned Pelosi and Bush's Work Relationship Because of Her Gender

And Republicans wonder why Affirmative Action is still necessary.

When discussing how Bush and Pelsoi will work togther, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said Pelosi will be considered "an equal leader in government", and that "There are no questions of whether they sit and talk as equals," adding, "I think it's impressive that no one has any questions of whether they can work together regardless of gender." (H/T CNN)

Why in the world would anyone question whether a man and woman can work together? Where does this Fratto come from? 1952?

This type of thinking does not bode well for a nation that is supposed to pride itself on its equality. No wonder we haven't had a female president to date - there are still assholes like Fratto wondering if men and women can work together.

Welcome Back to America!

As a new day dawns on the United States, brought with it is a fresh start, and on this particular day comes a fresh start for America.

Welcome back to oversight.

Welcome back to investigations.

Welcome back to checks and balances.

Democracy is a wonderful thing, and it's on a day like to today that you can feel the ultimate pride of living in such a wonderful system.

Here's to the end of Bush 43's unfettered rule, and to living in a one-party system for 6 long, painful years!

Update (H/T to C&L for the video): Swearing in of the New Senate!



Update II (H/T again to C&L): Nancy Pelosi becomes the first woman in the history of the United States to become Speaker of the House.

Democratic Congress Could Mean More Money and More Oversight for NIH

Since 2003, Bush and the Republican-led Congress have cut funding for the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a branch of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), by 12%. But, Joe Finkelstein writes, "the NIH will have friends in high places when Democrats take over control the House and Senate...but how generous lawmakers can be is unclear with tight budgets curbing spending for the near future. From the latest issue of the JNCI:

After a 5-year period when the budget doubled, funding for the institutes has foundered for the past few years under a Republican-controlled Congress. What small increases the NIH has seen have been largely wiped out by government-wide budget cuts and the rising cost of research. When the 110th Congress convenes in January, the new Democratic leadership is expected to shift the legislative agenda and funding priorities. They are also expected to take up NIH reauthorization legislation, which would bump up the budget goals and probably include provisions designed to encourage cross-institute collaboration.

If you do not have access to The Journal, click here for the PDF File.