I would appreciate it if you would summon the common decency to finally answer the question all of your ConyersBloggers have been asking you for SIX MONTHS.

WHY ARE YOU STAYING THE COURSE ON NO IMPEACHMENT?

This Nation, no matter what direction the Decider take us, especially if it's over that cliff, will need health care, affordable to all, like it or not.

I gave a laughable comparative to China and democracy in the last thread... we can do the same with social and health services too, you know!

====================================================
You aren't defending, protecting, preserving the Constitution of the USA
When you allow the usurpations of the Constitutional laws of the USA.

Congressman Conyers, do you honestly think that Bush will not veto this bill, also? Or expect you to alter it to a form that is antitheticial to its intention? Why do you see it as constructive to discuss legislation that has very little chance of surviving the destructive agendas of this administration, but you refuse on discussing the option of removing members of the destructive administration?

Without compiling the evidence needed to justify such a huge expenditure, promoting universal health care in our fascist nation will be like pissing on a forest fire.

It might seem like a good idea at the time, but best case scenario, all your gonna do is burn a badly needed body part.

To further this cause I would suggest you join Mr. Cuomo's investigation into the abuses of the Medicaid System by insurers, doctors, and hospitals.

PROVE to America that the keepers of the public trust regarding health care, are criminally taking advantage of our gullibility. Stop the thievery and prove that we actually spend enough to have universal health care, if the entitled ones actually cared about health, instead of bleeding America dry.

OT; Paris Hilton announced that she would be appealing her 45 day sentence for violating probation. No problem. Do like they do up here. Schedule her appeal for ten days after she serves her sentence. The moot point precedent has been established, why not make it for rich folks too? Throw her ass in jail like a mere citizen. You never know, she might like it.

Another dang.

Anyone remember the 80's television program BJ and the Bear, about a trucker who owned a pet monkey...well we all know that Bush is the mother of all truckers with Rove as his pet monkey but what nobody knew (suspected maybe) until now was how Bush was driving the government's eighteen wheeler on the highways of justice and smashing everything in sight that had the remotest connection to the rule of law. His latest, the politization of the justice department...

http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Play/17056/1/Countdown-Maddow-Schlozman.wmv/

So called "Health Care" in this Country is actually, thanks to the AMA-FDA-PHARMA cartel, "Management of illness." We NEED an emphasis on PREVENTIVE MEDICINE! (It is both cheaper and more effective, as well as being cost-effective, since well people do not take time off from work for illness, nor do they spread illness by going to the workplace in spite of being sick. Since Allopathic Physicians know NOTHING about Prevention, and could not possibly care less, because there's no MONEY in it, provision MUST be made for ALTERNATIVE MODALITIES! Naturopaths, Homeopaths, Chiropractors, Acupuncturists. "Rife-ologists", Herbalists (who probably know more about actual cures than ANY Allopath), et very much cetera MUST be allowed in the tent, instead of being forced to practice in the shadows. Oh, I know that the E$tabli$hment will throw up all over the idea - thus you will KNOW it's a good one! MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO CAN ACTUALLY CURE ILLNESS INSTEAD OF PALLIATING SYMPTOMS GET A CHANCE TO DO SO INSTEAD OF BEING BANNED FOR THE PROFIT OF THE CROOK$ IN CHARGE!

Denny Crane of 'Boston Legal', has a built in excuse for when he shoots people or embarrasses his firm. He blames mad cow disease.

Between the madness of Georgie, and the appearance of his mother, his insanity might be genetic or caused by eating bad beef. Considering the statements of Barbara while looking down on the New Orleans refugees, I believe the problem is genetic.

The poisonous fruit doesn't fall far from the tree. Especially when the tree doesn't fork.

While this is nice, and necessary, I see that you're still avoiding the issue that brought most of us here in the first place, and why we bought your book "The Unitard vs The US Constitution".

How disappointing that Superman turns out to be a complete fraud.

I'm sure you've noticed the lack of traffic and posts here? There's a reason for that.

Rusty's right, you're "staying the course". Eeeeeeeewwwwwwwww.

At least we've got Waxman to depend on.

----------
"Impeachment, of course, is a matter of Constitutional law, not personal discretion on the part of individual lawmakers."

Last year, Congressional Democrats allowed the Bush administration to ram through one of the worst laws in the nation’s history — the Military Commissions Act of 2006. This year, the Democrats pledged to use their new majority to begin repairing the profound damage the law has done to the nation’s justice system and global image.

But there are disturbing signs their pledge may fall victim to the same tactical political calculations and Bush administration propagandizing that allowed this scandalous law to pass in the first place.

(snip)
We hope habeas will be added to the bill by the committee, or that other sponsors of measures to restore the ancient right, including Representatives John Conyers Jr. of Michigan and Jerrold Nadler of New York, and Senators Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Patrick Leahy of Vermont, will find ways to bring their bills to a vote.

The Democratic majority has a long list of wrongs to right from six years of Mr. Bush’s leadership. We are sympathetic to their concerns about finding a way to revive habeas corpus that won’t die in committee or be subject to a presidential veto of a larger bill. But lawmakers sometimes have to stand on principle and trust the voters to understand.

This is one of those times.

The Democrats’ Pledge

Good.

I was worrying what you guys were going to come up with. It doesnt look like you can do better than this, just now.

I think this move should be accompanyed by a change in strategy. It would be interesting to see how many times the question, "Why are we in a wreck?" can be asked, before the funds run out. There is more than one way to say this, for example, 'Most folks need a reason to kill. What's yours?", i'm sure that is very plain.

It is called, Framing the Argument.
Frosted Flake

Dear Mark,

Congress gave away one of the oldest Constitutional rights. Tell them to take it back.

Congress made a terrible mistake last October, and allowed President Bush to damage one of the oldest founding principles of our democracy. They gave the President the authority to seize people and hold them without ever explaining why – despite the fact that the Constitution itself says he should not have that power.

Now some members of the House have recognized how big a deal this is, and they're trying to set it right. Today Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) is beginning a fight to restore the right of habeas corpus, which Congress gave away.

Tell your Representative to Restore our Constitutional rights to habeas corpus.

http://action.truemajority.org/campaign/habeas_corpus

Maybe it sounds like a legal technicality, but the habeas corpus right is pretty simple, and pretty important. Keith Olbermann of MSNBC called it "the right of anyone who’s tossed in prison to appear in court and say 'Hey, why am I in prison?'."1 Without that right, people get thrown into places like Guantanamo Bay for years with no evidence other than the say-so of a bounty hunter collecting his $5,000 fee.2 And legal experts say the law is written so that anyone, U.S. citizen or not, could get that treatment if they run afoul of the President.3

It's hard to write about even the basic facts here without sounding overly-dramatic, but this is how it is. One of the reasons we fought the Revolution was so that a king could not imprison people without a court hearing. Taking away that right is not protecting America, it's dismantling it.

Congressman Nadler is trying to add language to an existing bill which would restore habeas corpus. If that fails, he promises to bring it up again, as an amendment. If that fails, there are new bills waiting which would undo the damage of last October's "Military Commissions Act." Send your message now to tell your Representatives to do what it takes to restore this cornerstone of American democracy.

Matt Holland
TrueMajorityACTION Online Director

For More Information:

Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States:

“The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” [italics added]

The right of habeas corpus is one of the oldest founding principles of our democracy – the right of someone held by the government to ask why they have been seized. The Military Commissions Act cancelled that right, and I insist that Congress restore it. I urge you to support efforts by Rep. Nadler to add language which does that into the Defense Authorization bill, and also to back bills such as the Habeas Restoration Act.

"Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said that "the odds would be good" for a signing statement on the next supplemental, considering that Bush has in the past shown a predilection for excusing his administration from contentious bills. But Levin did not offer any clues as to how Democratic leaders would counter Bush."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050907J.shtml

If Congress were to shut down and work solely on the business of impeaching George W. Bush, this country would be so much further ahead than any so-called laws \ signing statements enacted by this Congress.

One of the chief architects of the BushCo/PNAC war of election, is crying in his soup over being found to be in violation of the World Bank's rules.

Paul Wolfowitz and Robert Bennett are crying "unfair" after the bank's board gave them 48 hours to respond to allegations that he used his position to give his unmarried sex partner a huge raise.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Here is an excerpt of an article:

The Bush administration, which nominated Wolfowitz, an architect of the
Iraq war, to lead the multilateral institution in June 2005, is pressing for the bank's directors to give him more time to respond to the allegations of favoritism.

In a report given to Wolfowitz Sunday, a bank investigatory panel concluded that he had clearly violated bank rules, a European source said.

The committee gave him 48 hours to respond, but his lawyer, Robert Bennett (news, bio, voting record), called the treatment "terribly unfair" and asked Tuesday for at least five days to answer the allegations.
------------------------------------------------------------------

As a main architect of the war, this man helped turn America into a nation synonymous with torture, kidnapping, aggressive acts against already weakened third world nations, and blatant disregard for not only the rule of law but humanity as a whole.

He wants to whine about fairness? He wants 5 days to respond to the charges?

Throw him in Gitmo for 5 years. That'll give him plenty of time to think about his response. If he doesn't kill himself or wind up naked under a pile of Muslims, he can explain his actions then.

When Constitution supporting Americans whine about fairness, the Neocons always say, "Who told you the world is fair?"

Strip him naked and run an A/C unit as he's forced to undergo long periods of standing on a box with his arms raised. When he can't take anymore, waterboard him.

He doesn't like the world bank terms? Maybe he'd like to experience the manner in which America treats people like him.

After all, he can't very well complain about ill treatment if we use the methods he supports, can he?

Or would it be "unfair" to treat him the way he wants others treated?

Maybe Gitmo should stay around for a while. You never know when a faithful public servant might need a little incentive to be honest.

I will say that when Bush was again chosen if indeed he was chosen fairly I was truly dismayed at the incompetence and fear the American people displayed in committing a most despicable and cowardly act that of re-electing a lying torturer who was forewarned yet sat by as our country was attacked early on his first watch. I don't believe the American people knew what they were into.

On the one hand it seemed ripe to some people to undertake the grand experiment of having some local yokel from the square dance run things for a while and show them foreign folks just what we're made of. Well, they got their guy and the experiment, if it was to see if some lowbrow shit kicker could handle the most important 'job' in the world is a miserable failure.

Our air and water is a mess, our rights are being squandered, we can't or they won't ably assist natural disasters as seen in Katrina and Kansas and we're stuck in the wrong damn war for however long because of George W. Bush's obstinate and inept incompetence.

The crimes of the Bush regime are many and if we don't impeach just think of the precedent that will be set, the lowering of the bar for future generations and we will have left these future generations less well off than we were left by our predecessors Some legacy.

There are people who rightfully speak of the injustice of the Nixon pardon by the late Gerald Ford. This act some say has led to today's political climate in which this administration flaunts the rule of law and disgraces the constitution with its vile acts abroad and at home. Well, what kind of example will it set if these criminals are not prosecuted? Think of future generations and future administrations and how they will interpret the rule of law. Think how evil men and I hate to use the word evil in today's world but evil men and women will subvert the laws of our land.

Multi-tasking is what this country needs to do. Fight his damn war while gathering evidence and courage to impeach his ignorant ass.

Are we up to it? We can still show greatness … but time is running out

Impeachment is the only answer if we as a people are to be cleansed.

Majority of Iraqi Lawmakers Now Reject Occupation

WHEN THE PRESIDENT DOES IT, THAT MEANS IT'S LEGAL?

====================================================
You aren't defending, protecting, preserving the Constitution of the USA
When you allow the usurpations of the Constitutional laws of the USA.

Bush vows second Iraq veto

"A 'no' vote in July would have dramatic consequences," Gates said.

"We will have forward spent so much money to keep the troops in the field by that time that the truth is ... I would have to shut down significant elements of the Department of Defense in August and September because I wouldn't have the money to pay salaries."

A 'NO' vote? That would be your bosses veto refusing the money right? Not Congress refusing to give him money.

This statement is another blatant lie. It's like we haven't heard enough of them already. Here is the truth. (Page 11 of 45)

How Urgent is Passage of the FY2007 Supplemental

In past years, Congress has been under pressure from the Army to pass supplementals quickly in order to ensure that the Army will have enough funds for both its wartime and peacetime operations. The FY2006 Supplemental was enacted in mid-June 2006, which the Army claimed created considerable management problems. The Army is currently claiming that the supplemental needs to be enacted by the end of April to avoid such problems.13

In this year’s bridge fund, however, Congress provided $28.4 billion to meet the Army’s operational needs, some $7 billion higher than last year’s bridge fund. The additional funds could reduce the pressure to pass the supplemental quickly. Using DOD data, CRS estimates that the Army could cover its operational costs till about June or July 2007 by using war funds in the bridge, temporarily transferring procurement funds to operations, and tapping monies in its baseline budget that would not be needed until the end of the year.14

The rest of the Congressional Research Service Report, dated March 14th, 2007, goes on further to provide a complete debunking of the urgency for money.

How much is possibly available from procurement funds? Estimates place that figure as high as a cool $61.4 billion.

Because Procurement money is carried over from one fiscal year to the next, it becomes difficult to determine exactly how much money is available in a given fiscal year for Procurement. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that as of June 2006, $2.17 billion remained to be spent of the $6.8 billion appropriated in the fall of 2005 for FY 2006. In June 2006, Congress appropriated an additional $14.7 billion for FY 2006. This means that, as of June 2006, $16.8 billion remained to be spent of funds appropriated for procurement during FY 2006. The GAO concluded that the bulk of this $16.8 billion would most likely be rolled over into and spent in FY 2007. If indeed most of this $16.8 billion rolled over into the current year, it would mean that the Department of Defense would have upwards of $61.4 billion to spend on Procurement alone this year (the $16.8 billion carry over, plus the $44.6 billion to be appropriated for Procurement for FY 2007).

$61.4 billion? That's 2/3rds of what you asked for and half of what Congress offered you.

Try again Mr Gates. I'm not buying your bullshit.