Lake Tahoe Blog

Welcome to a view from Lake Tahoe. Whether due to the abundant fresh air, or the high altitude, sometimes things seem much simpler in the laid back mountain life I have come to love. I am often perplexed by how complicated life can become, and I know this is but a taste of things to come.

Perhaps it is just my mid-life crisis, but, I know I am not alone when I state that many of the major events and policies I encounter, simply do not make sense. Some friends tell me that trying to understand how the world works will drive me crazy. I agree. But unlike some of my friends, I cannot simply watch and ignore. Hence my blog.

I touch on a variety of subjects in this blog, ranging from current events, to not so current events, diatribe when needed, and on life here in the mountains. Dates posted of are those of the original post, editing occurs as necessary.

(08/07/2008): Over a year ago I wrote about the world's most confused blackman, Ron Christie. While I still believe Ron holds this honorary title, there is another black man nipping at his heels. That man is Joe Watkins. This republican pundit emits a non stop stream of non sequiturs trying to defend his candidate John McCain.

Last week Joe defended one of his positions by declaring that our president was commander in chief of the american people. Poor Joe, he seems to have forgotten his grade school education. Our constitution declares, for all to read, the president is commander in chief of our armed forces. Although it is clear, that our current president has also forgotten his grade school education on this topic.

And today, Joe declared on MSNBC that Barrack had received more money from big oil than had John McCain. Joe repeated this claim even after David Shuster corrected the record. And Joe definitely has trouble hiding his facial expressions when spouting his lies, Joe is one of those folks who cannot control talking out of the side of his mouth, indicating that he knows he is lying.

Watch him as he interrupts his opponents, see for yourself. Joe really does talk out of the side of his mouth. In Joe's case, it is the right side of his mouth, go figure.

(08/05/2008): This has to be the best come back ad I have seen. Take that wrinkly white haired guy!

(08/04/2008) Last week the republicans and John McCain, with the help of our corporate news media demonstrated they knew who buttered their bread as they led a week of the most embarrassing political banter seen in quite some time. From caricatures of Barrack Obama as nothing more than a black male version of Paris Hilton or Britney Spears, to a depiction of Barrack as Moses, to a concentrated efforts from network news anchors to try to pry from Barrack's mouth that "the surge" has cured, and can cure, all of our nation's problems.

And republicans are scheduled to push their drill our way out of high gas prices policy by staging a week long spectacle in the halls of Congress which is in August recess. A policy that even a cursory examination of, will do nothing to change the price of oil, or of gasoline. A popular misconception narrative by pundits suggest, see, the president rescinded the executive ban on offshore drilling and the price of oil dropped! This non sequitur, ridiculous on its face, is more appropriately a reason to repeal the "Enron Loophole" because it goes to show that speculators have taken over the price discovery mechanism for the price of oil. These folks also ignore that demand is falling.

Not covered by the major media were some important oversight meetings including a meeting held by the by the House Judiciary committee on "Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations". This 5 hour plus meeting aired on CSPAN provided an in depth discussion of the many ways that our current administration has violated fundamental principles of the structure of our republic and discussed the ramifications and possible solutions to reclaim our Constitution.

Three most vocal republicans, Congressman Dan Lungren of California, Congressman Steve King of Iowa, and Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona all made fools of themselves in a vain attempt at partisanship by incorrectly calling the hearing an impeachment proceeding and asking questions and offering rebuttals clearly based on false premises, mainly that our administration is acting within the law and our constitution and that somehow all of this is sour grapes about policies, which even the three congressman seemed to acknowledged, are failures.

Despite repeated republican attempts to have the meeting adjourned due to public clapping and cheering during testimony, the hearing confirmed what everyone is taught in grade school about our Constitution, but is somehow easily forgotten by republican pundits still clinging to failed policies.

"Witnesses led by Dennis Kucinich, Elliot Adams, Rocky Anderson, Bob Barr, Vincent Bugliosi, Bruce Fein, Maurice Hinchey, and Elizabeth Holtzman presented an overwhelming case for impeachment."

The testimony confirmed many abuses including the fact that cherry picking intelligence and presenting that information to Congress to make the case for war in Iraq constitutes fraud, that there are no provisions in our Constitution for cherry picking which laws are to be enforced by the administration by issuing signing statements, that the blanket wiretapping of our citizens by the NSA is illegal, and that it is illegal to torture even if you try to redefine the act.

Two of my favorite comments were from Rep. Hinchey who stated the obvious, that we had not captured Bin Ladin because we needed a bogie man for the continuance of the 'war on terror' and by Rep. Scott who lamented that if the administration is protecting us against terrorists, who is protecting our citizens from the administration?

So why did the major news media fail to report on the meeting? Some insight can be gleaned from David Rothkopf's new book "Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making," wherein David makes the case that one person in every million are the true wielders of power and policy, that our government is ill prepared to implement policies that go against the grain of the "superclass" whom are legally bound by generating profits to share holders irregardless of the good and the will of the people.

And how will this all end? With history as a guide, by grass roots revolt by the people. Congress could help, as testimony revealed, that despite political banter to the contrary, impeachment can be accomplished very quickly based on the administrations own admissions and that impeachment can rally our country to a more positive leaning rather than divide it.

(07/14/2008): Fresh off his ex post facto law (in itself illegal) FISA scam that guts our 4th amendment, today Mr. energy policy himself rescinded the executive ban on offshore drilling claiming that every extra dollar American consumers pay at the gas pump for a gallon of gas is one less dollar for food on our tables. Duh.

Equally clear is the fact that our president lacks any shred of integrity, any shred of honor, and over 99% of every word he has uttered to the American people is a fabricated lie that is eagerly supported by the sheep in our country who are too lazy to learn the truth. It doesn't help that our spineless congress places partisanship above the good of the people and has failed to call our president out on his ridiculous claims of unitary executive power and his felonious behavior.

I am embarrassed, not only by our president, but by the sheep that foolishly follow and carry the water, deliberately deceiving the general population with the unbridled support of our president's misguided policies.

The biggest fallacy is referring to the oil markets in the traditional sense of supply and demand in the free market. Even a novice economist understands that both the supply and demand curves for oil are inelastic. This means that as the price goes up, demand does not fall and that the supply does not go up. Demand does not fall because it is difficult to fill up your car with anything but gas. The supply does not increase because the oil oligopolies do not have an incentive to start new production which will increase their costs and reduce their profits. By anyone's definition, oil oligopolies do not operate as a free market.

It is not that hard to connect the dots. Despite all the rhetoric, we did not go into Iraq because we face an imminent danger, we went there to reverse the nationalization of Iraq's oil reserves. The initial cost of this adventure was pegged around $50 billion and while Saddam was easily disposed we were prevented from appropriating Iraq's oil reserves for years, resulting in more and more billions of dollars 'borrowed' by congress appropriating the funds for the so called 'war effort' which the federal reserve then printed up and sold. Understandably, this led to a decrease in the value of the dollar which decreased the value of many investments. Then some very smart investment brokers figured out that they could hedge the decline of their assets by speculating in oil futures. This trick, the deregulation of oil futures, occurred when investment banks were freed to act like commercial banks minus the regulation. The so called "Enron Loophole".

The American public has been sold the Brooklyn bridge and conditioned to love it. By any definition, profits are being privatized and the losses are being socialized. And while republicans are fond of the old mantra about democrats raising your taxes, republicans are too dense to realize that their policies cost the average American much more than any tax savings they have provided.

I have long written that the only way to get out of this never ending mess is to end our energy dependence on oil. Opening up off shore drilling does not guarantee that big oil will drill, after all, they have over 64 million acres of land available for new drilling and they have not to date placed many new drill bits into the ground.

We need to convert our transportation system. This could happen much more quickly than any efforts at off shore drilling. We could be on our way toward energy independence long before a single drop of new oil from offshore comes to the marketplace. We converted our electricity grid off of oil in less than a decade.

It seems ironic, that our only hope is that Iraq kicks us out of their country and that the world court pursues Bush and his cronies for war crimes. Then our congress and the American people would be forced to understand the truth and our great American spirit will be unleashed to forge forward, into the new century with new ideas and new hope.

So while inside the beltway, where there is immense fear of truth, where everyone is afraid to implement new proposals that will take this great country into the next century, one person from the oil patch is talking and making sense. His name is T. Boone Pickens.

Perhaps you have seen his commercials. I urge all to visit his web site and learn how we together, can solve our crises.

(07/08/2008): There is a man on the campaign trail that is attempting to use humor. He always starts his jokes by laughing, relates what is suppose to be funny, and finishes the joke with more laughter. Often times laughing harder than anyone in the audience, a singular wit.

John McCain's speech writers don't seem to include anyone familiar with humor. At the basis of all humor is some element of truth. John's problem is, that as a presidential candidate truth seems to be something to be shunned. While he might have been a man of integrity previous to his campaign, his current reliance on old, long discredited political talking points are at best distasteful.

I'd be laughing too, if any of the current republican policies had actually borne fruit. But I have learned, that many of the policies practiced by the republicans only ring true if you are at the top of the heap, that upper 5%. For 95% of us these policies are ruining our lives and our country.

There is something about John that does make me laugh and that is the sight of John wearing those sunglasses. It is puzzling to me why John's wife, a woman of wealth, has not purchased a more fashionable pair. And that's not too mention the belly rolls when I hear John speak on policy.

Perhaps John should consider insurance sales. There is a company that will guarantee your child's right to buy a policy at age 28 if you purchase a policy while they are young. Seems to me, that most of John's policies are based on that premise, proposing solutions today that may bear fruit in the year 2046.

(06/30/2008): It is indeed a sad time for our Republic. The Senate voted 80-15 on cloture for The Real FISA bill and declared once and for all that despite our Constitution that we really are a nation ruled by men and that we are not a nation ruled by law.

I would like to deeply thank Senator Barbara Boxer for her vote against cloture. And I would also like to thank Senator Feinstein for her effort to communicate with me on her decision. I remain deeply disappointed over her efforts to limit the role of a co-equal branch of government, the judiciary, with her vote for cloture. Unfortunately I will need to spend an additional few hours to respond to her latest attempt to justify her vote.

And let there remain no doubt, that Senator Clinton was lying about her support and fight for the little guy as she could not even be bothered to cast a vote or to actually lead a meaningful fight for our constitutional rights to be secure in our right against unreasonable search and seizures in our own homes.

While I expected that Senator McCain would support our police state policies, it is disappointing that Senator Obama stated that security concerns trump our 4th amendment rights. That these folks believe that it is alright to gather up the private communications of all americans for over 5 years with zero accountability with the notion that we will not let it happen again completely misses the point that the information was obtained and still exists to be data mined to the NSA's content in their effort to find the terrorists, apparently everyone is a suspect, to be treated as guilty and having to face the notion that we can never be absolved from this guilt.

And if you really want to know how far down the rabbit hole we've crawled, consider this, it is now considered far left wing to fight for our 4th amendment rights.

(06/24/2008): A little history never hurt anyone! Was this the start of Senator Hunter's statement of our long and successful tradition of overthrowing governments? So why did Democrats authorize $400 million for covert operations in Iran?

(06/20/2008): Last Sunday, Father's Day, Senator Barack Obama gave a speech, that was widely reported as getting tough with the black community over family issues, where he stated that he was amused over parents who went over the top, throwing a celebration party for their children after they graduated eighth grade.

Celebration? For the eighth grade? Graduating eighth grade is hardly an accomplishment. Barack went on to ask what about ninth grade, tenth grade, what about college, what about a PHD? His point was that parents who were celebrating their kids graduating from eighth grade were setting the bar of expectations far too low. You're suppose to graduate from eighth grade.

It is the setting of low expectations that has me worried as this phenomenon certainly permeates our society today, especially when you consider the banter of many of our politicians. Hillary Clinton and John McCain are perfect examples as they both explain and justify their positions with political talking points that are only believable if you had not graduated the eighth grade.

You don't have to look very hard or deep to find examples of low expectations. Numerous recent examples of this surround the high price of gas at the pump as more than a few republicans have taken to the house floor and declared that the democrats are responsible for the high price, calling it the Pelosi Premium. This low flying political banter seems intended to back a policy of drilling our way out of the problem (which we have attempted for the last 30 years), a justification for turning over more public and offshore lands to the big oil companies, a band of corporate misfits that won't even drill on the 64 million acres of already available oil leases and to date have shown absolutely no willingness to increase their R&D budgets in light of the record breaking profits they are currently posting.

I am not sure who these republicans are speaking to, for it would take a limitation of an eighth grade education to believe this political argument in light of the overwhelming testimony that the 'Enron Loophole' shares most of the responsibility for consumers getting gouged at the pump. This notion, that big oil must strike to open more oil leases while consumers have fear in their hearts over the price of gas is typical of the low expectations that these folks exhibit toward consumers.

This morning, in a frightful speech, Steny Hower, the house majority leader, stood on the floor and announced that a compromise had been reached on the issue of warrant less wiretapping of American citizens declaring that neither side was happy. He is referring to HR6304 which passed the house today by a vote of 293-129. The bill is claimed to be a victory for the liberty of all Americans by strengthening our constitutional rights.

Strengthening of our constitution rights? Who was the nitwit that altered our inalienable constitutional rights? And under what legal authority? After all, no federal statute law can alter the Constitution.

Those of us who graduated from eighth grade know who these nitwits are and they include members of both parties who were informed of the illegal NSA programs instigated by the Bush administration and sat by too afraid to defend the constitutional rights of all Americans.

It is the members of both parties, whose only expectations are those of being either democrats or republicans instead of the much more honorable and lofty goal of being American leaders. That HR6304 offers the telecom companies immunity from past aggressions can only be viewed as a contemptible effort to cover their rear ends and the rear end of our illustrious president.

They all knew it was illegal and now that we know all about it our politicians are more concerned over facing accountability and saving their seats, than they are about the transgression. In fact, the democrats will not hold our president accountable for his illegal and impeachable behavior because they want Bush in office as a campaign issue as demonstrated by democratic leaders last week in a ready for prime time press conference only aired by CSPAN.

This notion, that we face danger, a danger so great that we must abandon our constitution, can only come from folks who failed eighth grade civic classes or those who can't grasp the illogical argument that we must abandon what we are fighting to save, in order to save it.

I look forward to a day when our leaders inspire us to achieve and lay down the gauntlet to those with minimal expectations, denying liberty at every corner, who think that Americans need to be needlessly spied upon to ensure that we are indeed good Americans.

HR6304 is an outrage and I will certainly not be voting for anybody that supports it in our upcoming elections. There is a reason that I have a visceral reaction after listening to politicians that seem to believe we are too stupid to understand the truth.

(06/09/2008): Since I last wrote last year about the false notion that free world markets controlled the price of gas, the price at the pump has jumped another $1 per gallon. On May 26 I paid $4.399. And as of late, more congressional hearings were held to discuss this topic.

Multi-millionaire oil executives continued to swear under oath that the oil oligopolies indeed exhibited characteristics of open and free markets. It would appear that these fine gentlemen need to take a refresher course in economics. Testimony was also given that it was demand from emerging economies of China, India, and others that are driving up the demand while it was our refusal to open drilling in Anwar and off of our continental shelves that is stifling supply.

Oh really? In fact we still hear the old republican saw, today repeated today by Congressman Marsha Blackburn, that we need to increase the supply of that dirty old fuel that supplies the majority of energy to our transportation industry. In fact, clueless republicans are blaming liberal environmentalists for the problem rather than admit that the oil oligopolies are raping the wallets of all Americans at the pump.

Marsha, why are only 20% of the oil exploration leases available pursued? Why is the R&D budget of big oil less than half of that of Microsoft?

Follow up testimony painted quite a different picture as some in congress were trying to get a handle of the effect of speculation on price. While I have refrained from writing about the effect, it became clear prior to the last election that speculation was indeed a primary culprit when one of our largest financial institutions changed their mix of futures contracts and the price of gas at the pump dropped just in time for the elections.

And if you take a quick look at the daily supply of crude and compare it to consumption, you will find that supply does exceed demand. The notion that world wide demand is the culprit for dramatic prices increases is not supported by factual data.

Growing congressional testimony points toward speculation and outright greed as the major reasons for the dramatic rise at the pump. While the oil executives guess that the actual cost of this resource should be in the $60/barrel range, and some suggested that future replacement costs of oil reserves demanded a price closer to $90/barrel, none of these suggestions comes close to today's prices in excess of $130/barrel.

In fact, there are those that believe that the price of a barrel of oil is divided neatly into thirds, one third of the price is the actual economic cost, one third of the price is the premium that oil producers have greedily demanded be paid, and a full third of the cost is due to speculation.

Let's be clear, futures contracts are intended to smooth the fluctuations of price in market prices. But today, it appears that speculators are using this financial instrument to rake in millions of dollars of windfall profits from the market place. The start of the phenomenon has been traced back to Senator Phil Gramm, who back in 1990 slipped in a provision to a bill, in the middle of the night, that shifted the burden of proof requiring regulation to the consumers, commonly called the Enron Loophole. One of the major fallouts of this legislation was to reduce margin requirements in so-called dark markets, to an unprecedented and historically unproven unsound level of around 3-5%.

Speculators, free to run rampart, took out major future contracts that depended on the price of oil going up and up. When these contacts became due, the dramatic fall of the dollar made these contracts worthless. Their answer? They bought up more of the same hoping to control the market and to continue to drive the price up. In fact, it was testified that Goldman Sachs is one of the largest holders of home heating oil in New England and they are deliberately withholding product to artificially limit supply.

Is it any wonder, that Goldman Sachs is predicting that the price of crude will reach $150/barrel? Why does a contract for crude oil need to change hands 30 or more times before the product gets delivered to the consumer? It would appear that the deregulation policy started in the Reagan years has reached a tipping point and it has become abundantly clear that capital markets, when allowed to operate without regulation, shed their moral compasses in their quest for the almighty dollar. Oddly enough, we were warned of this during the Carter administration.

The nearest analogy for this corporate greed is that of a virus which will eat away at it's host until the host dies. The artificial price of oil is affecting nearly every aspect of our economy, raising the cost of food (of course we have a food shortage), raising the cost of air fair, and in general, limiting our freedoms and productivity by restricting our mobility.

If old hacks like Senator Clinton, really lived up to their hype of fighting for the little guy, then she, and others, should return to their jobs and demand and pass new regulator authority to clamp down on the rampart speculation. The price of a gallon of gas would immediately fall to sound levels below $3/gallon.

(05/23/2008): Over the past decade we have witness some remarkable un-American events unfold in our political system epitomized by the Republican efforts to turn our two party system into a single party system as exemplified by the now disgraced Tom DeLay and by the continual practice of the politics of personal destruction practiced by the Bush administration.

Even today, both the Clinton and McCain campaigns seem to believe that the people of this great nation would be lost without them, as they and the old party establishment believes that our democratic system is only meant to dole out scraps of wealth to the vast majority of our population. We are constantly told that issues are just to complicated, that real progress is unattainable, because that is just the way it is.

Large corporations add to this nonsense by telling us that Americans just make too much money and that is imperative that everyone take a drastic cut in our standard of living because in the new global economy the majority of folks in the world work very long hours for often times pennies per hour. Of course, the executives of these corporation cannot be paid enough, often times millions of dollars per year, to dole out their wisdom that Americans are just too fat and stupid to compete globally. Witness Steve Balmer of Microsoft, who stated that they would not need to go overseas to hire if only those arrogant Americans did not expect to make more than $50K per year. These corporate heads fail to see the larger picture. Take one look at the controversy surrounding Vista, an operating system that 1 year after it's release still doesn't work worth a damn. You get what you pay for, if you want cheap software labor you end up with buggy software.

I'll admit even as a child, I never did take to the notion of you can't do this, or you can't do that. It wasn't until I reached high school that I met someone that preached that you could reach any goal and while I was there we won three state championships in a row. And while it was President Kennedy's race to the moon that fueled my early ambition to become an engineer, it was George Lucas who stirred my imagination when he combined the philosophy of Joseph Campbell into a 3 decade long trilogy of the epic story in space, Star Wars.

While politics and history are but a recent interest of study, mainly brought on by my instincts for self preservation, it is becoming more evident that perhaps politics has always been about personal power and wealth. Only today, with tools like the Internet, can we finally shed the blinders of trust our politicians demand and work toward real solutions that move our country back to the greatness we all believe it deserves.

So it is fitting, that I post a tribute to those who have stirred my spirit and soul and provided the truth for all of us to see, even if it is through the tears of joy. May I present 'The Empire Strikes Barack'.

(05/17/2008): A remarkable event occurred in the House of Representatives this week, an event that went largely unnoticed by most major news outlets. The House failed to approve the latest request for funding for the war in Iraq. The measure failed because a large number of republicans voted 'present' rather than cast votes of yes or no. The unusual event was prompted by republican demands that the house pass a clean bill, a bill that only contained funding for the war. The bill as presented on the house floor also included funding for more important domestic issues like $5 Billion to fix the levies in New Orleans.

Afterwards house republicans gathered around C-SPAN cameras to conflate the English language with meaningless talking points that any American that has pursued their patriotic duty to become informed about the issues would find insulting.

And just when everyone thought that our lame duck president was out of the picture, news coverage and outrage became extreme when our president, in a speech given in Israel, claimed that anyone that did not support his ideology were the equivalent of Nazi appeasers of the late 1930s. The outrage came to a head on Chris Matthew's Hardball when a conservative 'bafoon' Kevin James failed to enumerate exactly what the word appeasement meant.

Afterwards, Chris appeared on both Countdown and Verdict and declared and stated the obvious. Since the Bush administration came to power there has been a determined effort to discredit anyone that has questioned policy. Regardless of the motivation, it is clear that this type of behavior is not a characteristic of democracy, rather a tool used by those to thwart democracy.

Chris' comment was long overdue and refreshing. I would like to thank Chris for his definitive statement.

The comments of our president mirrored the republican tactics prior to the last midterm elections when Donald Rumsfeld gave a speech declaring that anyone who questioned the administration's policy was also guilty of nazi fascism. It is little wonder that republican representative Tom Davis exclaimed that if the GOP name was dog food, it would be taken off the shelf. These folks need to stop conflating the English language with meaningless talking points. And it doesn't help, that John McCain takes our president at his word.

The republicans have a lot to answer for as their so called 'war on terror' has preempted their sworn duties to uphold and defend our constitution. The have turned this country into something I do not recognize. It will be many, many years before I trust them again.

I would also like to thank Barack Obama, both for defeating the woman who believes that words are important except when she speaks them, and for immediately calling out our president for his shameful performance in front of the Israel Knesset.

If appeasement exists, then it is clear that our own administration is guilty as they have failed to capture Osama Bin Ladin and they have effectively given him safe harbor in western Pakistan.

(04/22/2008): While it has been many years since I watched any of the programming at ABC, the recent Democratic debate sponsored by ABC wholly justified my never returning to this network channel for any type of reasonable news reporting. The first hour of debate epitomized exactly what is wrong with our great country, it is run by folks that only seem to have but one tool in their toolbox, that of politics.

Not that all politics is bad, but the fundamental premise of politicians is not to speak the truth, but to speak in ways that they guess will move you the voter into a certain course of action. It does not matter that a politician's words often contradict earlier spoken words, or that the words are spoken in Rovian style, that is to say, I deny that I use the Rovian playbook, but watch as I use every play contained within. And I have watched as the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party has squandered her lead and continues to deny that she has lost. She has gone from a debate point of encouraging her opponents to not pile on, for fear of giving the Republicans ammunition, to giving the Republicans everything in the kitchen sink to use against her own party. Shame on you Hillary.

Rather than pontificate on and on for millions of words, Hillary's first excuse for her story about sniper fire, and never mind that no one could actually speak a million words in one day, I prefer to leave you with Baracky, The Movie, which states in a few short minutes what this election is all about.

(02/14/2008): In a disgraceful action today, republicans in the House of Representatives walked off the floor in an unbelievable attempt to make fascism the rule of the land. The temper tantrum began when the house considered contempt of congress citations for previous individuals of our current administration (Josh Bolten & Harriet Miers) rather than bringing up the Senate passed FISA bill that grants immunity to the telecom companies. Falling in line with the continued fear mongering of our president yesterday, the republicans continued to issue propaganda about why giving telecom companies immunity from judicial challenges to wide spread wiretapping of all Americans, for actions that they claim were not illegal, are critical to protect us in the never ending war on terror.

Lie after lie. The need to monitor all the communications of all Americans is claimed to be the radar of the future by Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security, an invaluable tool to combat terrorism. To hell with our fourth amendment! Yet we are told that wide spread monitoring of our private communications are not occurring, despite clear evidence that such activity is occurring and has been occurring since before 9/11.

Let us be clear, our government has always had and continues to have the legal authority to spy on the bad guys. What they don't have and want, is the ability to spy on all Americans. They say that all Americans must be considered guilty in the light of the war on terror and that all Americans can never be absolved of this guilt. We must be continually monitored to prove our allegiance.

Every argument I have heard to date for the need for telecom immunity is a blatant lie. Our president and the republicans would raise up the white flag and surrender centuries of freedoms that are the rule of the land and enumerated in our Constitution. All in an effort to hide and conceal illegal activities instigated by our administration that believes that a country at war cannot and must not remain true to our most sacred freedoms. That the president must remain above the law and accountable to no one in our so called time of war, a war that is scheduled to last for the remainder of this century.

The purpose of immunity is clear. It is an attempt to prevent the proper functioning of our judicial system. If there has been no wrong doing, then you would expect our administration and the republicans to welcome the judicial oversight. If you have done no wrong, then what is there to fear?

But the fear does exist. And it is clear that the truth about what has happened to our country will be devastating to all politicians that can be shown to have known what was going on and failed to act to defend our constitution. Acts of treason, each and everyone of them.

So instead, we see an attempt to pass the buck on fear, to blame the fear on the terrorists. I know I am not alone when I say that I do not fear the terrorists. What I fear is the deliberate tearing down of our sacred rights granted to all Americans, the destruction that those whom believe we are really in a war never before faced would bestow on America, and claim that the surrender of our freedoms is required.

The real enemy is not abroad in a far way land on the opposite side of the world, the real enemy is contained right here at home, within our borders. To see their faces, you only need to listen to their rhetoric of lies. They are the ones claiming that we need to be afraid.

Take Action: House Must Stop Unconstitutional Senate FISA Bill


	Call your representative: No warrantless spying, no telecom immunity.

The Senate has capitulated to President Bush by passing a dangerous and unconstitutional FISA bill that allows warrantless government eavesdropping on Americans and grants immunity to giant phone companies that handed consumer data over to the government without a warrant.

"Though many questions still remain unanswered about years of domestic spying, the Senate has effectively sealed the vault by handing over immunity to the phone companies,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the Washington Legislative Office. “The over forty legitimate lawsuits currently pending against them may end before they have begun. It’s a fact that Americans had their rights violated and now, by closing the courtroom door, they may be left with no recourse.”

Stopping the awful Senate bill -- which the House can do -- is vital to protecting your constitutional right to make a phone call, send an email or search the Internet without the government monitoring your activity.

Your representatives in the House need to hear from you. Whether you have called already or this is your first time, a quick phone call today will send a clear message that Americans don’t want the House to send an unconstitutional bill with telecom immunity to the President.

>> Take action: Call your representative: No warrantless spying, no telecom immunity.

(02/05/2008): For the last several days Republicans in the Senate have been delaying any action of revisions to the fascist Protect American Act (FISA) because they want to grant immunity to the telecom companies. Telecom companies that we are told over and over again, have done nothing wrong in their efforts to wiretap all communications of all American citizens.

Since the instigation of wide drag net style wiretapping of all phone conversations, email, and other Internet communications, not a single case nor a single terrorist has been arrested, or captured, nor has a single terrorist plot been uncovered. After 7 years!

There are those that believe the war footing strategy of preemptive monitoring of US citizens is absolutely required, as they hope, and it is clear that is all it is, that they can prevent a future attack on our country and that it is necessary to violate our Constitutional rights in order to protect us.

And now we have learned that the republicans in the house have passed retroactive immunity for president Bush for possible felony war crimes as defined by the Geneva Convention for any and all actions they have taken since 9/11.

The notion that our constitution is not a death wish or that an actual ticking time bomb scenario actually exists is fantasy and will never justify stripping our freedoms away. The delusion that the executive branch of government has the right to deny the functioning of both the legislature and the judicially branches signals a clear victory for the terrorists. This preemptive doctrine needs to be silenced, permanently.

Until and unless we get a declaration of war from our congress, the Republicans should just shut the hell up, less follow the war monger McCain down to defeat in the upcoming elections.

Senator McCain believes we can just win this war, if only the American people would let us win. McCain should go talk to the players of the New York Giants and ask them if they won the Super Bowl because the Patriots let them win. In fact, I know of no contest that was fought and won, because someone let them win. Perhaps this is why McCain lost 4 fighter jets in Vietnam, perhaps he thought the enemy was just going to let him bomb his targets uncontested.

If we are truly at war, with the greatest threat we have ever faced, then lets act like it. Declare war, mobilize this country, initiate the draft, raise taxes, and send a few million boots over there along with a few navy battle groups. Get the job over with and done. Victory is not measured by the side with the fewest casualties, as proponents of the success of 'the surge' would have us believe, our greatest victories have come with the heaviest casualties, just read the history books.

Until then, don't pretend to tell the American public that we are at war and that all we have to do to win is let our government restrict our constitutional rights and tell us all to just go shopping.

(02/04/2008): I would have gone to Reno and placed a huge bet on the NY Giants. When Bush was elected I would have sold everything I own and purchased oil stocks. I would have never moved in with that woman. If all us knew yesterday what we all know today, we would all be very wealthy. The fact that we all cannot see the future is why we all are still alive.

It should be obvious that this defense that Hillary and her supporters keep using to try to defend her war votes is basically an admission that no one can see the future. Rather than admit that the vote was a mistake, either because she is a woman who needs to look strong or because of the fear of political fallout, Hillary has refused to admit the truth. Hillary has further compounded the issue with her explanation on her vote on the Levin Amendment, again, failing to relate the truth with yet another revisionist view of history. The amendment did not propose that our country hand over decisions of our national security to the United Nations as she claimed during the last debate.

Does this woman have no shame? Or is she just continuing the Clinton tradition of saying what ever she believes will get her elected? From my perspective, she is just another Bush dressed up in woman's clothing, unable to tell the truth because she believes we will not know the difference or perhaps, the most likely, she cannot handle the truth about herself and her candidacy.

These are the traits of our leaders that have many wanting change. This is America, and yes, we can handle the truth. Hopefully this nation of sheep will blindly follow no more and boldly reach for a new version of politics.

(01/22/2008): Last night's Democratic debate was indeed interesting. I often wonder and worry about Hillary's neck, her head bobs up and down constantly while she is supposedly listening and along with her air brushed head shot used in most media clips, she makes a perfect rendition for a perpetual motion bobble head doll. And she has practiced her eye exercises so often, to combat the natural aging process around her eyes, that I am sure she does not realize she can no longer control the tendency of her eyes to appear to bug out of their sockets.

The most disappointing, and most predictable part of the debate came early as the Clinton dirty political strategies, right from the Carl Rove playbook, were displayed in full force. Yes, as soon as the race got close the infamous Clinton political attack machine was kicked into high gear. The primary attack strategy, made famous during the Bush administration, is to take your most serious weakness and accuse your opponents of it.

Yes, I had listened to some of the quotes from Obama, and then listened to the Clinton's attacks. How Hillary and her husband come up with the re-fabrication of Obama's comments is sheer outright shame. Never in a million years would I have confused Obama's comments about the Reagan administration with even a tacit endorsement of Reagan's policies, yet there she was, claiming with a smirk on her face that her democratic rival had actually endorsed the Republican agenda.

And the notion that Hillary had trouble debating Obama, because somehow she felt that Obama always had some sort of excuse for why his actions did not follow his statements, claiming that Obama's record was important, pointing out that Obama had voted for appropriations for the Iraq war after he initially voiced strong objections to the war, completely dismisses that Hillary also voted for those appropriations. The difference was, Hillary supported the war effort. She has quickly forgotten how in a nation in shock was easily coaxed into the war, hell, even I initially supported the effort in Iraq even though I did not believe a word about the connection to 9/11 or WMD.

Hillary has also seemed to have forgotten, that it was only a few short debates ago, that she was demanding that her opponents not attack her for fear of giving the Republicans ammunition for the general election.

Obama is to be congratulated, for taking on the tired and false accusations of Hillary and her husband. Bill has been waving his finger around in the air so often as of late, that the infamous finger waiving incident where Bill explained that he did not have sexual relations with that woman re-appeared in my head and I was once again reminded of why I did not trust the Clinton administration.

Hillary just does not get it. The Republicans do not have a prayer of hanging on to the White House, her expertise at waging political war with the Republicans is simply not necessary. And it makes her look exactly like Bush, even though she waves a flag with different colors. The end result of waging Clinton's war will be to anger what's left of the Republican party, strongly increasing the chances of more dead-lock and increasing the odds that we will again, be unable to solve our problems.

Only in politics can the pot call the kettle black and not take notice. And indeed, Hillary started her morning today claiming that Barrack's criticism during the debate was rehearsed.

After engaging in an illegal, secret surveillance program, President Bush is in no position to make demands of anyone. Americans expect you to stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law. That means:

1. Rejecting telecom immunity: President Bush is demanding immunity for companies that broke the law when they handed over phone data and emails to the NSA without a warrant. He wants Congress to bury the truth by stopping lawsuits against the phone companies. When the phone companies are off the hook, Bush is off the hook, and there would be no incentive for companies to follow the law in the future.

2. Individual warrants for Americans: Surveillance tactics that allow the government to gather huge amounts of phone and email data on Americans without a warrant are unconstitutional and violate our American principles.

Americans expect you, the most powerful member of the Senate, to lead on this issue, not cave in to President Bush and his allies in Congress. Please don’t let us down.

(01/09/2008): Since this summer Clinton's lead in the polls consisted of large double digit leads which prompted their campaign to run on the idea of the inevitable president. Out of this effort we heard time and time again that Clinton was a woman of experience, a woman ready to lead from day one. After her gaff over driver's licenses for illegal immigrants her lead began to diminish, as it became clear to more Americans that Clinton really had no solid beliefs other than those brought to her by the pollsters and those of her faith in her husband's presidency, which she clings to despite his betrayal.

During the weeks leading up to the Iowa caucuses, her campaign rolled the dice time and time again trying to define a message that would stick and halt the bleeding. Alas, it did not work and she lost the vote in Iowa. Afterwards, Clinton showed no shame in decreeing that she really never was the clear and favorite front runner. And we saw this line of political shame continue on to New Hampshire, epitomized by Dee Dee Myers who insisted that Clinton never was, nor ever had been the clear front runner.

Before the polls closed yesterday in New Hampshire, the pollsters were certain that Clinton was trailing by as much a double digits, prompting her campaign to leak that they were considering not running in South Carolina, considering firing much of the campaign leadership, and trying to find ways to redefine itself to right the sinking ship. Hillary herself, even cried at the prospect of not becoming president.

In the big picture, the fact that polling data suggested that Clinton's lead had diminished from last summer was expected by everyone who watches political theater. What is troubling is that after 7 years of lie after lie coming from the Bush administration, that Hillary and her team cannot be straight forward and honest about the polling data. Why they feel it is in our countries' best interest to continue the fabrics of lies to the American public is extremely troubling. In this regard, Hillary is no different than Bush.

The pollsters were wrong it is claimed, few stopping to ask if the data had been correctly reported, their data tainted by the bump by the loss in Iowa. Clinton's tearful scene was credited for bringing out the less educated, over 40s vote of New Hampshire women who felt that the media had played Clinton just a little to hard.

Despite the ideological differences between the Bush and Clinton families, there is one thing they share, the ability to use politics as a means to an end, regardless of the 'truthiness' of their lies. They will follow the lies to the White House if they can.

Are we really a nation of sheep? Will the public succumb to being lead by the pollsters in which the Clinton campaign obviously believes is gospel? Time will tell.

A Surge of More Lies
by Congressman Robert Wexler

A new troubling myth has taken hold in Washington and it is critical that the record is set straight. According to the mainstream media, Republicans, and unfortunately even some Democrats, the President's surge in Iraq has been a resounding success. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

This assertion is disingenuous, factually incorrect, and negatively impacts America's national security. The Surge had a clear and defined objective - to create stability and security - enabling the Iraqi government to enact lasting political solutions and foster genuine reconciliation and cooperation between Sunnis, Shias, and Kurds.

This has not happened.

There has been negligible political progress in Iraq, and we are no closer to solving the complex problems - including a power sharing government, oil revenue agreement and new constitution - than we were before the Administration upped the ante and sent 30,000 more troops to Iraq.

Too many Democrats in Congress are again surrendering to General Petraeus and have failed to challenge the Bush Administration's claims that the surge has been successful. In fact -- it is just the opposite.

The reduction in violence in Iraq has exposed the continuing failure of Iraqi officials to solve their substantial political rifts. By President Bush's own stated goal of political progress, the Surge has failed.

Of course raising troop levels has increased security - a strategy the Bush administration ignored when presented by General Shinseki before the war in Iraq began - but the fundamental internal Iraqi problems remain and the factors that were accelerating the civil war in 2007 have simply been put on hold.

The military progress is a testament to the patience and dedication of our brave troops - even in the face of 15 month-long deployments followed by insufficient Veteran's health services when they return home. They have performed brilliantly - despite the insult of having President Bush recently veto a military spending bill that enhanced funding and benefits, and increased care.

Despite the efforts of American soldiers, the surge alone cannot bring about the political solutions needed to end centuries of sectarian divide.

As it stands, little on the ground supports the assertion that Iraqis are ready to stand up and govern themselves. Too few Iraqi troops are trained, equipped and combat ready, and they cannot yet provide adequate security. Loyalty is also an issue in the Iraqi army as Al Queda and Sunni insurgents infiltrate their defense forces. The consequences turned deadly just recently when an Iraqi soldier purposely killed two U.S. troops.

On the streets of Baghdad and Mosul, the Sunni and Shia factions have paused their fighting, awaiting guarantees and protections that have not yet been delivered. As Iraqi refugees return, there is no mechanism to help them rebuild their lives, nor recover their now-occupied homes. Neighborhoods once mixed are now segregated.

In Northern Iraq, Kurdish terrorists conducting nefarious operations across the border into Turkey have compelled our NATO ally to strike at bases, inflaming tensions between Baghdad and Ankara.

The surge is working? We suffered more U.S. casualties in 2007 than in any other year of the war. We can't afford any more of this type of success.

How can we create the situation that is most likely to deliver political progress in Iraq? Not by continuing the surge and occupation. Our best chance (there is no guarantee) is by putting real pressure on the Iraqi government to force action. Telling the national and local Iraqi leaders that we are withdrawing our troops can help accomplish this goal. Today, the majority Iraqi Shia government led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has little incentive to act when American troops remain in the country to provide security and stability.

Based on the Administration's plan, John McCain's proposal of a 100-year US occupation could be a reality!

The Democratic Congress must act aggressively to first cut off funding for the surge and then the entire war. Many of my colleagues avoided a showdown with the administration because they mistakenly believed such a fight would endanger the safety of the troops.

In fact, we must accept that every soldier killed or injured in the coming months should have already been home. Every billion dollars of war-appropriations we spend from here on should have been spent on genuine priorities here at home such as children's heath care.

Enough is enough: While the Administration over-commits American forces in Iraq, we see Al Qaeda regrouping and Osama Bin Laden still at large. We remain seriously bogged down in Afghanistan, and are witnessing a crisis in Pakistan that has left a nuclear country on the brink of a meltdown. America's resources and attention are desperately needed elsewhere and our soldiers must no longer be needlessly sacrificed as we wait for Iraqis to stand up.

The Surge has failed. If my colleagues gullibly accept the moving rationale for the Surge, just as so many have for the war itself, we will have failed as well.

(01/08/2008): With the New Hampshire primaries upon us, yesterday was filled with news not fit to air. In particular, the episode where Senator Clinton started crying. It was not so much that she cried, it is why she cried and what she said during those teary eyed moments.

Clinton says she sees what is happening in this country and in that matter she seems years behind the general population whom not only see, but live daily, with what is happening. Her sadness and tears, she says, are due to the fact that 'I (she) have so many opportunities for our country', and only she has the proper vision to reverse what is happening. She feels that she has the unique knowledge to tell each and everyone of us how we should live our lives, which is the only fairy tale I see in this primary. While her nostalgia for her husband's presidency is touching, it is clear that this country is not eager to go back, to reverse course, what we want is an entirely new course.

Clinton is fond of touting her experience that she claims is filled with the good fight, the fight against the oil companies, the fight against the insurance companies, the fight against the health care industry, and the fight against Republicans.

The price of oil has reached $100/barrel and the cost of a gallon of unleaded regular here in Tahoe is now more than $3.50. Meanwhile the oil companies are raking in billions in profits and subsidies also totaling billions are still on the books.

And then there is her universal heath care program that would require everyone without insurance to buy insurance. I can hardly wait for her to send me a check for $10,000 to cover my insurance. How does mandatory insurance reduce health care costs or allow free markets to reduce the ever rising cost of health care? You'll remember that her plan back during the Clinton years was one of those deals composed in secrecy and in the back rooms.

Clinton's rhetoric was also filled with the notion that we are 'hiring' a a new president. In that light, she continues to lay claim to accomplishments that were the work of many and she continues to presume to speak for the entire democratic party. This was particularly noticeable with her attempts to quiet criticism of her during the debates. And she constantly lays claim to leading although she is only one senator of a hundred. She points to the claim that she was one of the first to warn president Bush not to go to war with Iran back in February of last year, but it was Senator Biden at the end of the first Foreign Relations committee meeting last January, who laid down this policy.

During her tearful statements she stated that running for president was a hard job, that in part, her tears were the result of the many attacks she has endured. And within seconds, she laid down more attacks on her opponents, the tears still in her eyes.

Is this woman crying because America will be lost unless she is elected as she claims? Or are her tears the result of a continuous fabrication of accomplishments, the bloated resume she is using to get hired, that the public has seen through with the result that she lost Iowa, claiming afterwards that she was never the front runner, and the fact that she may not win in New Hampshire?

And then there are those priceless condescending moments, like yesterday with Chris Matthews, where she says "Now Christopher!" as if she were talking to a child. This is particularly troubling, since it was Chris that suggested Hillary use the "heat in the kitchen" response to explain her predicament that was caused when she couldn't articulate her position on giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Prior to Chris' advise she offered up several explanations.

Clinton has accomplished in less than 1 year what it took Bush over 4 years to accomplish. She now garners the honor of my fast forward button, my mute button, and my change channel button on my remote whenever she appears on my screen.

(01/02/2008): With the Iowa caucuses but a day away, tonight Senator Clinton will be running a 2 minute ad that will be shown on every TV network in that state. Part of this ad has been shown on several political shows this afternoon and it was really tough to believe your eyes. Clinton has so much makeup on that she appears to look about 30 years old! Gone are the scars from fighting with Republicans, gone are the wrinkles of experience that come with age. How is one to believe, that a 30 year old woman has the makeup of our chief executive? That she, seems more concerned over appearance than substance.

Of course, this is par for the Clinton campaign, virtually everything she says or does has been made up. She made up the fact that she was against the war, she made up the fact that she has 35 years of experience, she made up her listening tours where she tells all of us what she thinks, she made up her statement about getting us out of Iraq - failing to commit to ending our troop presence there by the end of her first term. She made up the idea that she was the inevitable democratic candidate, she made up the statement that she knew former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto for 12 years when actually they only met once or twice. I don't doubt that anything she ever has said was made up from one thing or another.

Clinton thinks change means switching a Democrat for a Republican. I hope she clings to this dogmatic view, we want change yes, but to us it means much more. So if you want a president that believes it is more important to look 30, than go ahead, vote for her. For me, a sixty year old woman that feels the need to look 30 is a disaster in the making.

(12/18/2007): Yesterday the Senate brought up a new FISA bill for consideration. The proposed bill was the result of the work of the Intelligence committee, a committee that has knowingly allowed the truth to be hidden from the American public as testified to previously on the Senate floor. This bill included amnesty for the telecom companies, which differed from the bill produced by the Judiciary committee and the bill passed by the House of Representatives, which do not include amnesty.

It was refreshing to hear Senator Dodd present testimony that AT&T had installed fiber optic splitters in their San Francisco office that allowed the NSA to listen in and analyze all domestic communication traffic of US citizens without a court warrant and that further more, that the San Francisco office is not located near any telecom hub serving international telecommunications. It is clear, that the operation was not capable of monitoring our enemies, unless you consider American citizens as the enemies.

I was highly disappointed in Republican Senators (Bond, Kyl, Cornyn, Hatch, Sessions) who all stood on the floor of the Senate and declared, in essence, that it was unpatriotic to oppose the wiretapping of American citizens. Senator Bond had previously spent his entire 5-10 minute opening remarks in an Intelligence committee meeting on the topic, lecturing everyone about the importance of government secrets and national security. I grow suspect of anyone who feels the repeated need to remind me what day of the week it is. The last time I heard a diatribe like that, there was indeed, something rotten that needed to be hidden.

Senator Hatch even went so far as to declare opposition to granting telecom immunity to various conspiracy theories, from both extremes, as responsible for distorting the truth about the now infamous terrorist surveillance program and declared that somehow that American citizens were determined to undermine our government by breeding mistrust. He further went on to claim that we should trust the men running these programs, inferring that we are a nation of men rather than a nation of laws. That Americans mistrust their government because of the lack of candor and honesty never seemed to have crossed his mind.

The notion that corporations should be allowed to break the law and violate the rights granted to all American citizens is a notion bred of the rule of secrecy and fascism, not of the rule of law and democracy. If the telecom companies can be proven to have violated our constitutional rights, then they should pay the price. The several dozens law suits currently in our courts must be allowed to continue, to learn the truth. The continued erosion of our liberties, based on the threat and fear of another terrorist attack, is truly a victory for the terrorists.

I sincerely want to thank Senator Dodd, and Senator Boxer who voted against cloture, for standing up for our constitution. Their actions forced Senate majority leader Reid to withdraw the bill. They have proven beyond any doubt their true patriotism, unlike Senator Clinton, who constantly claims that she has spent the last 35 years fighting for the people, who could not be bothered to help defend our 4th amendment, instead remained in Iowa to promote her egotistical drive to become our first queen, ah, er, woman president.

(12/04/2007): During last week's Republican Presidential debate, CNN choose to allow a YouTube video to air which in essence, accused Congressman Ron Paul of being a quack with an ideology based on conspiracy theories. To Ron Paul's credit he correctly pointed out that yes, organizations do exist that believe that the world would be better served if all the nations of the world were governed from a global viewpoint or ruling body. In such a world, our sovereignty would end and our constitution would no longer be the supreme rule of law. The world government would have complete authority to ignore our basic human rights granted to each and every citizen of this country. And further more, that this government would not be elected by the people or act in the interests for the people.

Then Senator John McCain displayed his neo-con colors, conveniently attempting to rewrite history for all of us whom have never studied history and declared that Ron Paul was an isolationist, that it was an isolationist movement here in the United States that led to World War II! McCain's absurd claim of why we lost in Vietnam will go unmentioned here. Where and when have we heard that claim, recently repeated by Karl Rove, that somehow the world can be neatly painted into black and white, that we are either an isolationist country or we are not? I think not. This is right out of the neo-con playbook that believes that anyone that does not support our efforts at building a new world empire are traitors.

Thankfully, some in the audience booed. And rightfully so, if only for the reason that this is exactly the playbook used by the republicans for the last mid-term elections, started by the now rich neo-con patsy Donald Rumsfeld. And it did not work because it ain' t true. And thankfully, Ron Paul pointed out that McCain did not understand the term "isolationist", and that is a fact.

Have you ever wondered why our president appears to be lying all the time? Can it really be true that some of our elected officials really are incompetent? Then how, pray tell, did they win two elections? No, these folks are not incompetent, they are just following a different playbook and they are doing their best to hide this fact from the American public.

As Ron Paul points out, there are a small group of people that hold a very different world view than that presented to us by our constitution. One group in particular consists of approximately 130 of the richest people in the world. They are called the Bilderberg Group, a name coined from the name of the hotel in which they held their first meeting back in 1954. They meet once a year in total secrecy, ostensibly to play pinnacle, but they really do meet with world leaders and politicians to discuss the future of our world civilization. I have read reports that Senator Hillary Clinton was vetted by this group. In fact, vetting by the Bilderberg group is a prerequisite for most of our presidential candidates. Why else would Senator Clinton proclaim that she could not guarantee to end the war in Iraq, because she could not be sure of what she might find when she arrived in office? Think about it.

While the Bilderberg Group's intentions back in 1954 were deemed honorable, their methods over the years have digressed and today some consider them the force behind many world events, the so called shadow government that views our constitution as a road block to progress and truly does seek a one world government. This is a world whereby any means is justified by the end, there is no concept of Greek philosophy of 'justice, justice'.

And their biggest weapon is the consistent claim, that anyone who is cleared eyed about the world around them, is nothing but a conspiracy theory lunatic. These are the folks that believe we must shut down the Internet, for our own good, to prevent the public from being deceived by all the lies. These are the folks that tell us we must borrow 2 billion dollars per week to safeguard the American public from being killed by a terrorist, an event that has a probability of happening right up there with being stuck by lightning.

So, just for a moment, assume that our president is telling the truth, that financial interests do hold the trump card in world affairs. From what viewpoint do his statements ring true? Are our borders unsecured because we face an imminent threat from a terrorist attack, or are they open because it is helpful to establish the North American Union? Is the surge really working, or was the necessity of the surge a result of the animosity created when Paul Bremer went there to privatize the natural resources of Iraq and the Iraqis rebelled? Is our president's fear of a terrorist under every bed reality, or do the deliberate violations of our constitutional rights serve to help a new world order better control the population? The so called prison planet. If you spent some time time listening to our military leaders testify before congress, you can't help but hear one theme repeated over and over again, we need to control the Iraqi population.

Is the so called 'War on Terror' real, or is it just a smoke screen to tear down our constitution to level the playing field, make it easier to create the new world order? The elites know, that if their true agenda were made public, the resulting outrage would prevent their dreams from coming true. This is why Senator Fienstein believes that our country would be hurt from the vetting of truths about wiretapping our citizens and torturing our enemies, so she believes she must act to protect and obscure the truth about such events, to protect our country. To insist that our new AG Mukasey testify that water boarding is torture, would open the door to impeachment proceedings for our president.

And now we learn that our beloved president's warnings of World War III, delivered with a smirk on his face, concerning Iran and their so called program to develop a nuclear bomb was nothing more than more shock treatment as the recently released NIE report tells us that Iran halted it's efforts to build a nuclear bomb back in 2003. And I have known for a long time, that it is not the knowledge of how to build a nuclear bomb that is the hard part, in fact this knowledge is largely public domain, it is actually acquiring the material and manufacturing abilities to build and test a nuclear bomb that is the hard part.

So, when you hear someone shout "conspiracy theory" heed the warning, investigate the facts, and learn that there is only one conspiracy theory, that is the one that is meant to pull the wool over your eyes and deprive you of everything you hold dear, for the sake of the new world order, a one world government.