Words Matter

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Violence Has No Place in a Democracy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Sheriff Clarence Dupnik Calls Out Hateful Rhetoric

What an emotional day following the horrific and tragic shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona, and the death or injury of 18 others.  Pima Sheriff Clarence Dupnik gives voice to what has concerned me for years -- vitriolic, hateful rhetoric that permeates far too much of our public discourse.

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann delivered an excellent commentary on the subject as well that included taking responsibility for a comment he directed at Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her 2008 bid for the White House.  Violence has no place in our political process, and must be soundly denounced by individuals on all sides of the political debate.

This includes calling out violence comments on our own blogs and social network sites.  Until everyone takes responsibility the rhetoric won't end. 

I urge everyone to repeat after me: "The power to END violence BEGINS with ME."

Reid Still Doesn't Get It

Americans by and large know that if they break, or even bend, the law there is a price to pay. Well, unless you are a corporate CEO or part of the Executive Branch of government. THAT is the message being sent by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid -- who should know better. Unlike our president, Reid has been around awhile.

It's understandable that President Obama wants to remain focused on fixing the mess left behind by the Bush administration, but Reid should support Speaker Pelosi's call for an investigation on torture.

Senate Democratic leaders, joining forces with the Obama White House, said they would resist efforts by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other prominent Democrats to create a special commission to investigate the harsh interrogation methods that the Bush administration approved for terrorism suspects.

At a meeting of top Democrats at the White House Wednesday night, President Obama told Congressional leaders that he did not want a special inquiry, which he said would potentially steal time and energy from his ambitious policy priorities, and could mushroom into a wider distraction by looking back at other aspects of the Bush years.

The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, and other top Senate Democrats endorsed Mr. Obama’s view on Thursday, telling reporters that they preferred to wait for the results of an investigation by the Senate intelligence committee expected sometime “late this year.” But Ms. Pelosi renewed her call for an independent panel.

Mr. Reid, who repeatedly denounced the use of harsh interrogation techniques when Mr. Bush was president, suggested that naming a special panel would signal an intent to exact “retribution” and he sought to paper over the disagreement with members of his own caucus, like Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, who want a commission.

Hummm ... let's think about this.

ret·ri·bu·tion (rět'rə-byōō'shən) n.
Something justly deserved; recompense.
Something given or demanded in repayment, especially punishment.

Seems appropriate for the actions of the previous administration.

And what about our Constitution? Is it just a piece of paper, or is there meaning behind the words written? George Bush & Co. didn't seem to think it meant much -- but many of us do.

So come on Reid, it's time to get on board with what the American people want.


MUST READS:

Is Cheney Winning the Torture Debate?
By Eric Etheridge

Abu Zubaydah’s FBI Interrogator Removes the Legal Cornerstone of the Torture Regime
By emptywheel

Flashback: Bush’s FBI Director Said Torture Didn’t Foil Any Terror Plots
By Greg Sargent

Have You No Shame, Sir

Congress is moving as quickly as it can to recoup some, or all, of the $165 million paid out in bonuses to AIG executives. The behavior of these individuals is truly shameless.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) said Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (Mont.) would unveil a proposal by tomorrow that would tax up to 98 percent of the bonus money. "That will certainly send a message to the people at AIG and all others who try to benefit from the hardships the American people face," Reid said.

In the House, Reps. Steve Israel (N.Y.) and Tim Ryan (Ohio) introduced the "Bailout Bonus Tax Bracket Act" to create a 100 percent tax on bonuses over $100,000 that are distributed to employees of financial firms receiving federal bailout funds. Currently, the IRS withholds 25 percent from bonuses less than $1 million and 35 percent for bonuses more than $1 million dollars. The Israel-Ryan proposal would apply to all bonuses to government-supported firms such as AIG that have been given since Jan. 1.

The congressional efforts come as New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo announced that at least 73 employees of AIG's Financial Products unit -- the London-based division of the insurance giant that sold the high-risk derivatives blamed for the company's near-collapse -- got bonuses of at least $1 million. He sent AIG subpoenas yesterday seeking data on who received the bonuses and the justification for them.

I like the House plan. Why not tax at 100% BONUS money going to incompetent executives? If they want to receive their bonuses, then get off the Corporate Welfare train. Many of these same individuals have no problem attacking the truly poor who receive benefits.

The bonuses, guaranteed through employment contracts that had been made public to the government earlier and paid out on Friday, were offered as a way to lure or keep top talent to help sort out the financial situation at AIG, officials there said. But when news of the payments surfaced in recent days, lawmakers turned to the Obama administration, demanding that the U.S. Treasury attempt to claw back some of the money.

WHAT "top talent"?? You mean the people who got their company INTO this mess? It's time to clean house.

On Monday Sen. Charles Grassley had a suggestion for top AIG executives:

A prominent U.S. senator gibed that executives of the troubled insurer American International Group Inc might consider suicide, adopting what he called a Japanese approach to taking responsibility for their actions.

Senator Charles Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, made the comments Monday in an interview with a radio station in his home state of Iowa.

"The first thing that would make me feel a little bit better toward them (is) if they'd follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say, I'm sorry, and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide," Grassley said.

That might be a bit drastic, but I can certainly appreciate Grassley's anger.

Backtracking on his earlier comments, Grassley had this to say today:

"What I'm expressing here, obviously, is not that I want people to commit suicide," Grassley said on Tuesday. "But I do feel very strongly that we have not had statements of apology, statements of remorse, statements of contrition on the part of CEOs of manufacturing companies or banks or financial services or insurance companies that are asking for bailouts, that they understand that they are responsible for running their corporation into the ground."

Demand Congress Put the Brake on $700 Billion Bailout

The Associated Press reports:

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson urged Congress on Tuesday to quickly pass a $700 billion financial bailout, warning that letting problems persist would have dire consequences for the national economy.

The nation's top two economic leaders made the assertions in prepared remarks to be given later Tuesday to the Senate Banking Committee. Their latest take on the financial crisis came as the Bush administration and lawmakers scramble to forge an agreement on a plan that could be the biggest such bailout in U.S. history.

I don't know about you, but I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any longer!

If you haven't done so already, pick up the phone and call your Representative and your two Senators and let them know exactly how you feel.

In speaking with a staffer at Sen. Mikluski's office I learned that one of my two Senators had already voiced my concerns on the floor of the Senate.

Senator Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) took to the Senate floor today to urge Congress to take prompt but deliberate action to help resolve the financial crisis. The Senator voiced her strong opposition to allowing the Bush Administration to stampede a proposal through without careful vetting and consideration to ensure that middle class America is not punished for Wall Street’s errors.

“We must act with resolve, but we cannot be a rubber stamp for the Administration’s proposal. This gives sweeping authority to those who were asleep at the switch in the first place,” said Senator Mikulski. “This is a three-page bill that gives the Secretary of the Treasury unlimited power to intervene in our financial markets, without any review by Congress, agencies or courts. This makes Secretary Paulson a financial czar – it says, give us a blank check with no balances. Well, I say, no checks without balances.” [...]

“Americans are mad as hell and they want to know, what about them? They’ve watched Wall Street executives pay themselves lavish salaries. They’ve watched them do irresponsible lending practices. They’ve watched them do casino economics, gambling on risky investment mechanisms and now those very same Americans who’ve worked hard and played by the rules and were prudent investors, prudent savers, prudent citizens are asked to pay the bill for those who didn’t. [...]

“Now, George Bush said he was the first M.B.A. President. Well, hello? I don’t have confidence in this administration. Remember? This was the same crowd that brought us Katrina, FEMA and hey ‘you are doing a great job Brownie.’ Is this what we’re now supposed to say to those managing our finances? I don’t think so. We also have to prudently ask ourselves, ‘Are there better options?’

Sen. Mikluski is one voice among 100. You simply MUST call your Senators and demand that they join her in calling for accountability from this administration -- and to put the brakes on giving it a blank check. You can't afford NOT TO.

.

Rep. Tubbs Jones Dies

UPDATE: It's been a confusing day regarding the status of Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, but The Washington Post is reporting that she died at 6:12 pm this evening at a Cleveland hospital after suffering a brain hemorrhage.

Rep. Tubbs Jones was a key figure in Ohio Democratic politics and chair of the House ethics committee.

This is a huge loss for progressives, and for women.
_________________________

Below is what was reported earlier:

The Washington Post reports on U.S. Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones:

Tubbs Jones' office has released a statement saying that she suffered an aneurysm while driving last night. "At the present time Rep. Tubbs Jones condition has stabilized and she is receiving the best care available," the statement says. Local news reports say she remains unconscious.

Tubbs Jones, 58, is the first black woman to represent Ohio in Congress. She was a strong supporter of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) during the Democratic presidential primary ... Like her fellow Democratic members of Congress, she is scheduled to be a superdelegate at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. [...]

An already sad story on the serious medical condition of Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio) was made embarrassingly worse today by Capitol Briefing and other news outlets, as conflicting information prompted several erroneous reports that the lawmaker had died. As of this writing, she remains in critical condition in a Cleveland hospital.

I would encourage everyone reading this to send positive thoughts to Rep. Tubbs Jones. She is a much needed voice in Washington.

.

Question Congress During August Recess

In August, members of Congress leave Washington to spend time with their constituents at home. With the 2008 election campaign in full swing, now is the perfect time to ask current and potential members of Congress where they stand on various issues. One issue of importance to me is separation of church and state.

Simply by asking questions you accomplish two things: 1) you find out where a candidate stands on church-state matters, and 2) you demonstrate there are voters who value church-state separation.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State offers great suggested questions. Or come up with your own! Either way, it's important to get these folks on record so that you, and others in the audience who support church-state separation, will know where a candidate stands.

SPREAD THE WORD!

If you like the graphic above, visit the AU web site to get code to embed one on your blog!

.

Why We Need Darcy Burner in Congress

You can tell a lot about people by observing how they handle themselves during difficult times. Well, the grace that Darcy Burner exhibited under pressure this week is indicative of why we NEED her in Congress. Burner is a candidate for Washington State’s 8th Congressional District.

Thank You for Your Concern

As many of you may be aware, early this morning my home was destroyed by a fire. It appears to have been caused by a faulty lamp in my son's room. Unfortunately, our home and all of the possessions in it are a total loss, but I am so grateful that my family and I escaped safely. We may have lost our home and our possessions, but for the most part they can be replaced, and I feel like a true tragedy was narrowly avoided today. Please rest assured that while we have been a bit shaken by what happened, Mike, Henry and I are all okay.

Particularly, I am grateful to the wonderful men and women of the Redmond and Kirkland Fire Departments, and the investigators from the King County Fire Investigation Unit. Their rapid response and incredible professionalism brought the fire under control and kept it from spreading to our neighbors' homes. And these brave first responders even miraculously rescued my son's puppy, who we initially thought had perished in the flames. Sadly, our cat, Charlotte, did not survive the fire.

I am also deeply grateful for the expressions of support from friends, supporters and others who have called to express their condolences and offer their generous and heartfelt assistance. I am so moved by all of the offers of a place to stay, or clothes to wear, or all of the other offers of help that have poured in throughout the day. While we are fine for now, your kind expressions of support and concern have helped to sustain me through what has been a long and difficult day.

For those who would like to do something to express their support, let me suggest making a contribution to your local humane society or animal shelter in memory of Charlotte, or to the Washington State Council of Firefighters Benevolent Fund.

Thank you all for being there for us in my family's time of need. It means so much to us.

I would like to encourage everyone reading this to do one more thing. Please visit Darcy's campaign web site and make a contribution.

For more background on why we need her in Congress take a moment and watch this:


As Darcy mentioned above "we have a bit to sort out today, and then we'll get back to trying to change the direction of the country."

Take the time you need, but please do come back ... we need you!


h/t to Fran at FranIAm.

Why We Need 60

It's the magic number -- 60. You need 60 votes in the Senate to stop a filibuster. You need 60 votes to override a presidential veto. You need 60 votes to GET ANYTHING DONE in the Senate. The Democrats don't have 60 votes. So what we have is the most obstructionist Senate in history.

The National Women's Law Center reports:

On Wednesday, the Senate voted on a motion to advance the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a key bill that would have a major impact on the lives of women who’ve been subject to pay discrimination. While we didn’t get the 60 votes necessary to move to the next big step — scheduling a debate and vote on the bill itself — the fight isn’t over. Tell your Senators the bill deserves fair consideration on the Senate floor.

Women in the United States are still paid only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. For women of color, the numbers are even worse - African American women earn 63 cents and Latinas earn 52 cents for every dollar paid to white men.

Equal Pay Day - the point in 2008 when the average woman's wages finally catch up with what the average man earned in 2007 - was Tuesday, April 22. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would have given all employees a better shot at a fair workplace, making it easier to ensure justice for those who have been discriminated against based on sex, race, ethnicity, religion, disability, and age.

The New York Times wrote:

...[T]he bill would re-establish that the deadline for making a charge of pay discrimination under Title VII runs from when a worker receives unequal pay, not from the day a company first decided to discriminate, as the Supreme Court wrongly insisted.

Many employers keep salaries and raises confidential, as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg aptly noted in her dissent in the Ledbetter case. By making it clear that the 180-day clock restarts with each discriminatory paycheck, the act avoids rewarding employers that obscure lower raises given on the basis of such considerations as gender or race.

Far from eliminating the current statute of limitations for filing pay discrimination claims, as some opponents claim, it merely restores a reasonable notion of when the clock starts running. The House approved the same measure in July, but it remains to be seen whether enough Republican votes can be mustered to overcome a filibuster threat in the Senate.

The act’s defeat would please the Bush White House and the United States Chamber of Commerce. It would be a significant civil rights setback.

Take a look at how the Senate voted, and you will see why we need more Democrats in Congress. If you are not working on a campaign, sign up to do so TODAY.

States just say NO to abstinence only funding

More and more states are deciding to just say "NO" to abstinence-only sex education funding. The WaPo reports:

The number of states refusing federal money for "abstinence-only" sex education programs jumped sharply in the past year as evidence mounted that the approach is ineffective.

At least 14 states have either notified the federal government that they will no longer be requesting the funds or are not expected to apply, forgoing more than $15 million of the $50 million available, officials said. Virginia was the most recent state to opt out.

Two other states -- Ohio and Washington -- have applied but stipulated they would use the money for comprehensive sex education, effectively making themselves ineligible, federal officials said. While Maryland and the District are planning to continue applying for the money, other states are considering withdrawing as well.

Until this year, only four states had passed up the funding.

This is further evidence that Congress needs to find it's backbone and stand up to the president on the budget. Bush wants money trimmed from the overall amount, so let's take if from this ineffective program that states are rejecting? Are they considering this? No, Congress is poised to increase funding for abstinence-only sex education from $176 million to $204 million, with most of it going to community organzations. Sounds like faith-based community organizations to me.

"This wave of states rejecting the money is a bellwether," said William Smith of the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, a Washington-based advocacy and education group that opposes abstinence-only programs. "It's a canary in the coal mine of what's to come."

"We hope that it sends a message to the politicians in Washington that this program needs to change, and states need to be able to craft a program that is the best fit for their young people and that is not a dictated by Washington ideologues," Smith said.

Smith and other critics said they hoped that if enough states drop out, Congress will redirect the funding to comprehensive sex education programs that include teaching about the use of condoms and other contraceptives.

"I think this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back in terms of continued funding of these programs," said John Wagoner of Advocates for Youth, another Washington advocacy group. "How can they ignore so many states slapping a return-to-sender label on this funding?"

States are beginning to speak out about the dangers of abstinence-only sex education.

"Why would we spend tax dollars on something that doesn't work?" asked Ned Calonge of the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. "That doesn't make sense to me. Philosophically, I am opposed to spending government dollars on something that's ineffective. That's just irresponsible."

"These programs are dangerous," said Jonathan Stacks of the Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health. "We're trying to get people across the state to raise their voice on this issue. I think once those voices are heard, the legislature and the governor won't have any choice but to back the will of the voters."

Wake up Congress, and vote the will of the people -- whether it's for funding for comprehensive sex education, ending the war, or impeaching the most unpopular president in history.

Democrats Bow to Bush again!

Someone please explain to me how the most unpopular president in history can continue to have so much power over Congress? The Washington Post reports:

House Democratic leaders yesterday agreed to meet President Bush's bottom-line spending limit on a sprawling, half-trillion-dollar domestic spending bill, dropping their demands for as much as $22 billion in additional spending but vowing to shift funds from the president's priorities to theirs. [...]

The agreement signaled that congressional Democrats are ready to give in to many of the White House's demands as they try to finish the session before they break for Christmas -- a political victory for the president, who has refused to compromise on the spending measures.

And why should he compromise? He ALWAYS GETS WHAT HE WANTS!

The Senate is to vote today on the revised energy bill, and senators from both parties said proponents are close to reaching the 60-vote threshold. Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) summoned from the campaign trail the five senators seeking the presidential nomination for this morning's vote.

The new version of the bill meets a key White House demand by stripping out a requirement that utilities move toward generating 15 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources. It also pares back tax increases on oil companies by exempting independent energy companies from a provision that would end a manufacturer's tax credit awarded in 2005. [...]

God forbid we more toward renewable energy sources while fighting a war over oil.

Bush may also veto the spending package, even though Democrats shaved $22 billion from federal domestic programs to meet his demands, said Rep. Jerry Lewis (Calif.), the ranking Republican on the House Appropriations Committee. He added, "And I think we'll have enough Republicans to sustain a veto."

And God forbid the Republicans ever fund domestic programs ... you know, things that actually help people.

Democratic leaders tried to put the best face on their surrender on domestic spending levels, promising that the final bill will reflect their priorities, if not their preferred funding -- "the president's number, our priorities," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). She noted that the bill would increase funding for children's health programs, nutrition and medical research at the National Institutes of Health.

Democrats will also increase spending on heating assistance for the poor, health care for veterans, local law enforcement and border security, Democratic leadership aides said last night.

There is no way to "put the best face on their surrender." The most unpopular president in history always gets his way because he holds his breath and threatens to veto any bill that doesn't fall into lock-step with his demands. He NEVER NEGOTIATES, he ALWAYS DEMANDS ... and Congress always bends over!

To meet those goals, staff members on the House Appropriations Committee will probably target the president's "Millennium Challenge" international aid program, his abstinence-education efforts and the scandal-plagued "Reading First" education effort.

Why is the failed "abstinence-education" funding even on the table? Strip that from the bill if Bush is hell bent on having it come in at a certain level.

Senate Republicans will seek to add as much as $70 billion in war funding to the bill, without strings on the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq attached. Pelosi indicated she would vote against the final bill if such funds are included but made clear that Democrats are ready to make the concessions needed to avoid a veto.

Would someone please wake me in January 2009?

While Bush and Congress fight, people needing Social Security disability die

This is a topic that hits close to home for me. More than 30 years ago my mother became disabled following a series of heart attacks, more than one stroke, and ultimately surgery for lung cancer. When she first applied for Social Security disability she was denied.

She had paid into the system for decades, and was clearly disabled, but we were told the government routinely denied people the first time they applied, and that she should try again. Her disability finally did come through, about six months before she died.

Denying people benefits is a strategy still being used today, as hundreds of thousands of people wait for an appeals judge to settle their case. Fast forward 30 years, and I am now watching my sister go though the same process.

The New York Times reports:

Steadily lengthening delays in the resolution of Social Security disability claims have left hundreds of thousands of people in a kind of purgatory, now waiting as long as three years for a decision.

Two-thirds of those who appeal an initial rejection eventually win their cases.

But in the meantime, more and more people have lost their homes, declared bankruptcy or even died while awaiting an appeals hearing, say lawyers representing claimants and officials of the Social Security Administration, which administers disability benefits for those judged unable to work or who face terminal illness.

The agency’s new plan to hire at least 150 new appeals judges to whittle down the backlog, which has soared to 755,000 from 311,000 in 2000, will require $100 million more than the president requested this year and still more in the future. The plan has been delayed by the standoff between Congress and the White House over domestic appropriations.

There are 1,025 judges currently at work, and the wait for an appeals hearing averages more than 500 days, compared with 258 in 2000. Without new hirings, federal officials predict even longer waits and more of the personal tragedies that can result from years of painful uncertainty.

I encourage you to read the personal stories in this report, and think about what might happen if you or someone you loved became disabled due to an illness or accident. Then contact your member of Congress and ask them to increase spending to the necessary level.

If they give you the song and dance about funding, and ask where you think the money is coming from, tell them to go ask Halliburton for the $12 billion they "misplaced" in Iraq. That should more than pay for it!

Mr. President, would you like some cheese with your whine?

The president and Republicans in Congress are unhappy with Democrats. Why? Because the Dems are trying to carry out the will of the people.

The November 2006 election was all about ending the war in Iraq and bringing the troops home. The Dems have tried to accomplish this, but have been blocked at every turn by Republicans.

The American public would like to see and end to the president's out of control spending and tax breaks for the rich. Republicans are all about helping their "base" -- corporate CEO's -- to the detriment of the majority of Americans.

And the public wants affordable health care and prescription drugs, and funding for infrastructure like bridges and roads, public schools, etc. All things Republicans care nothing about.

The president held a press conference today to whine. Let him. He's done nothing but put Americans at risk, squander a surplus and all the good will we had around the world, and given tax breaks and no-bid contracts to his friends.

Bush friends dropping like flies

When you see a headline that says "Bush friends dropping like flies ..." the next logical question is "when will he?"

The latest pol to take a plunge is Australia's prime minister, John Howard. Howard suffered a major defeat on Saturday, losing his reelection bid to Labor Party leader Kevin Rudd.

Howard's defeat, after 11 years in power, follows that of José María Aznar of Spain, and political setbacks that lead to Britain Prime Minister Tony Blair's resignation. And what to all these former-leaders have in common? They were staunch allies of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

The world "gets it." Even the electorate in this country gets it, sending Republicans packing in the last election. So when is the United States Congress going to "get it" and start formal impeachment proceedings against Vice President Cheney and then President Bush.

The citizen of this country deserve to see these two war-profiteers forced out of office in disgrace.

Why do you think campaigning began last summer for the 2008 presidential election? Because the American public can't wait for this administration's term to end.

Congress will be back in session soon. Email your Representative to tell them you are thankful to live in a democracy that includes an impeachment process to protect its citizens against fascist leaders -- and urge them to use it!

Congress Screws Poor Women and Students

Is anyone in Washington, DC paying attention?

College women and poor women are now at risk for unplanned pregnancy because of a screw-up in Congress. A new change in federal law means poor women and students are now paying sharply higher prices for prescription contraceptives.

The New York Times reports:

The increases have meant that some students using popular birth control pills and other products are paying three and four times as much as they did several months ago. The higher prices have also affected about 400 community health centers nationwide used by poor women.

The change is due to a provision in a federal law that ended a practice by which drug manufacturers provided prescription contraception to the health centers at deeply discounted rates. The centers then passed along the savings to students and others.

Some Democratic lawmakers in Washington are pressing for new legislation by year’s end that would reverse the provision, which they say was inadvertently included in a law intended to reduce Medicaid abuse. In the meantime, health care and reproductive rights advocates are warning that some young women are no longer receiving the contraception they did in the past.

Some college clinics have reported sudden drops in the numbers of contraceptives sold; students have reported switching to less expensive contraceptives or considering alternatives like the so-called morning-after pill; and some clinics, including one at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Me., have stopped stocking some prescription contraceptives, saying they are too expensive.

“The potential is that women will stop taking it, and whether or not you can pay for it, that doesn’t mean that you’ll stop having sex,” said Katie Ryan, a senior at the University of North Dakota in Grand Forks, who said that the monthly cost of her Ortho Tri-Cyclen Lo, a popular birth control pill, recently jumped to nearly $50 from $12.

I just watched SiCKO yesterday, and reading this today is making me SiCKO again!

Abstinence only advocates love the change, but keep in mind this crowd thinks their parents rode to school on dinosaures!

Contact your members of Congress and urge them to fix this. And while you have them on the phone, if it's a Democrat you are speaking with tell them to get a spine!

Representative Joseph Crowley, a Democrat from New York who introduced a bill on the matter, said the change would require no taxpayers’ money to subsidize contraception. [NOTE: emphasis mine] The drug manufacturers would pay for any discounts, but would not be required to pay larger Medicaid rebates because of those discounts.

“We’re not promoting promiscuity, but we’re also cognizant that people live,” said Mr. Crowley, who is among the lawmakers who say the change that took discounts away from university clinics was inadvertent. “We’re talking about adults, responsible adults who want to do the responsible thing.”

God forbid taxpayers should help students and poor women prevent unplanned, unwanted, pregnancy.

Bush Hates Kids and Other Americans

The president appears to be attempting to remake his terrible image. He is suddenly concerned about fiscal responsibility -- well, unless the subject is war. The problem with the new Bush strategy is that he's going about it in precisely the wrong way. Is anyone surprised?

The Associate Press reports:

President Bush, escalating his budget battle with Congress, on Tuesday vetoed a spending measure for health and education programs prized by congressional Democrats.

He also signed a big increase in the Pentagon's non-war budget although the White House complained it contained "some unnecessary spending."

Bush vetoed a $606 billion health and education bill, his sixth veto. Congress has only been able to override one of them, a politically popular water projects measure. The president claims that Democrats are acting like a teenager with a new credit card.

Hummmm ... the Democrats want to spend money on health care and education? What teenager would want to spend their money on THAT?

The president, on the other hand, IS spending money like a teenager -- wanting it for war games, like $6.3 billion for the next-generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, $2.8 billion for the Navy's DD(X) destroyer and $3.1 billion for the new Virginia-class attack submarine.

The pesky Democrats want to spend tax dollars on things like:

• a 20 percent increase over Bush's request for job training programs.
  
  
• $1.4 billion more than Bush's request for health research at the National Institutes of Health, a 5 percent increase.
  
  
• $2.4 billion for heating subsidies for the poor, $480 million more than Bush requested.
  
  
• $665 million for grants to community action agencies; Bush sought to kill the program outright.
  
  
• $63.6 billion for the Education Department, a 5 percent increase over 2007 spending and 8 percent more than Bush sought.
  
  
• a $225 million increase for community health centers.

The nerve of them .... geezzz!

Since winning re-election, Bush has sought to cut the labor, health and education measure below the prior year level. But lawmakers have rejected the cuts. The budget that Bush presented in February sought almost $4 billion in cuts to this year's bill.

Democrats responded by adding $10 billion to Bush's request for the 2008 bill. Democrats say spending increases for domestic programs are small compared with Bush's pending war request totaling almost $200 billion. [...]

The $471 billion defense budget gives the Pentagon a 9 percent, $40 billion budget increase. The measure only funds core department operations, omitting Bush's $196 billion request for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, except for an almost $12 billion infusion for new troop vehicles that are resistant to roadside bombs.

As my good friend Tengrain, at Mock, Paper, Scissors, would say .... Impeach the mutha already!

When Dems Roll Over American's Lose

How many times have we heard Democrats say 'this is the best we could expect' regarding a nominee put forward by the Bush Administration. Do they realize this response is no justification for selling out the American public?

Of course it's the 'best' they can expect, because they NEVER demand better! The latest example is the Senate Judiciary Committee's vote on Michael B. Mukasey for Attorney General.

The Washington Post reports:

Two prominent Democrats, Sens. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) and Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), joined nine Republicans in voting for Mukasey, arguing that the former federal judge was the best candidate they could expect as the Bush administration's replacement for Alberto R. Gonzales, who resigned as attorney general in September under a cloud of scandal.

With 'friends' like Feinstein and Schumer, who needs enemies? Clearly they were not listening during the last election. The American public made it very clear the war is a critical issue, and anyone who would hedge on whether or not waterboarding amounts to illegal torture has no business being Attorney General.

Mukasey angered lawmakers in both parties by repeatedly declining to answer questions about the interrogation technique known as waterboarding, saying he found the technique "repugnant" but could not determine its legality without access to classified information. Some Democrats also said they were troubled by Mukasey's views of expansive presidential powers in wartime.

Schumer and Feinstein said they took solace in Mukasey's assurances that he would enforce any future waterboarding ban passed by Congress. That argument prompted a robust retort from Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.).

"He will, in fact, enforce the laws that we pass in the future? Can our standards have really sunk so low?" Kennedy said. "Enforcing the law is the job of the attorney general. It's a prerequisite, not a virtue."

Just how low can we allow the Bush Administration to set the bar? Wait, what am I thinking? We know how low they are ... but how low can we allow DEMOCRATS to set the bar?

Bush: Listening to the American People is a "Waste of Time"

In a recent WaPo article, Bush was complaining about Congress and threatening to implement new policy by executive order.

The White House plans to try implementing as much new policy as it can by administrative order while stepping up its confrontational rhetoric with Congress after concluding that President Bush cannot do much business with the Democratic leadership, administration officials said.

According to those officials, Bush and his advisers blame Democrats for the holdup of Judge Michael B. Mukasey's nomination to be attorney general, the failure to pass any of the 12 annual spending bills, and what they see as their refusal to involve the White House in any meaningful negotiations over the stalemated children's health-care legislation.

So let's take a look at this. Congress won't rubber stamp a nominee who wants to use torture, stealing from the poor to give to the rich, or denying children needed health care coverage.

Bush claims Congress hasn't done much.

"Congress is not getting its work done," Bush said. "We're near the end of the year, and there really isn't much to show for it."

Congress has increased the minimum wage, strengthened America's competitiveness by expanding educational opportunities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics from elementary through graduate school, passed ethics and lobbying reform legislation, implemented the 9/11 Commission recommendations, passed the largest increase for veterans affairs funding in history, upgraded the military health care and passed a 3.5% pay raise for our troops, passed a pay-as-you-go resolution committing to no new deficit spending, and passed legislation expanding stem cell research (which the president vetoed).

Yeah, what a bunch of slackers!

House Democratic leaders fired back at Bush with strong rhetoric of their own. "The president wants the same complacent, complicit Congress that was a co-conspirator in a coverup of what was going on in this country," said House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.).

What Democrats have NOT been able to do, despite strong public support, is end the war-for-profit in Iraq and bring the troops home. (Bush vetoed an Iraq war-spending bill that included a date for withdrawing American troops.)

In a post on Think Progress, Ali Frick sums up the situation well.

Bush is the one who's "wasted valuable time." He continues to bury his head in the sand and back a failed policy in Iraq.

President Bush met exclusively with Republican congressional leaders to discuss the SCHIP bill. Afterward, he held a press conference slamming the Democratic leadership for "not getting its work done" in Congress, stating that the Senate had "wasted valuable time" trying to end the war in Iraq:

BUSH: Congress is not getting its work done. Near -- we're near the end of the year and there really isn't much to show for it.

The House of Representatives has wasted valuable time on a constant stream of investigations and the Senate has wasted valuable time on an endless series of failed votes to pull our troops out of Iraq. And yet there's important work to be done on behalf of the American people.

Yeah, Bush ... listening to the American people certainly is a "waste of time.

According to Bush, the Senate has wasted time listening to the wishes of the American public. Sixty-eight percent of Americans want U.S. forces in Iraq reduced or withdrawn entirely, according to a September CBS poll. An October Washington Post/ABC poll also found that a majority of Americans "do not believe Congress has gone far enough in opposing the war."

Congressional Democrats have faced stiff conservative opposition in their efforts to end the war. In May, Congress approved a bill stipulating troop withdrawals from Iraq -- which Bush promptly vetoed. Two months later, Democrats pushed the issue in all-night Senate session, but Republicans again blocked the legislation.

The only person who has "wasted valuable time" is Bush, who continues to bury his head in the sand and back a failed policy in Iraq. As Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said in April, Congress's actions have been "helpful in demonstrating to the Iraqis that American patience is limited."

Repeating what my friend Tengrain at Mock, Paper, Scissors would say ... Impeach the mutha already!

Memo to Democrats

What a week it has been, watching our Democracy continue to crumble. I will let these fine voices elaborate on my frustration.

Taylor Marsh offers these comments:

Before a single Democrat condemns MoveOn's ad, they should insist that George W. Bush and the Republican Party repudiate the anti-military smears on war heroes that have been the hallmark of Mr. Bush's political career. ... - Paul Begala

A little good old political theater is what was in order today. Senate majority leader Harry Reid should have gathered Democrats together and when the Cornyn amendment came up they all should have walked out. Then on the Capitol steps Reid should have given a short speech on Republicans voting against the Webb amendment, which actually aided the troops, and that while soldiers are dying in battle he would not allow the Senate to be used for a political show. Not on his watch. End tape. [...]

One congressman from California showed more spine than Edwards and Obama
combined.

"I commend MoveOn for their ad and for speaking truth to power," said Stark. "Up is not down, the earth is not flat, and the surge is not working. General Petraeus betrayed his own reputation by standing with George Bush in opposition to the timely withdrawal of all of our brave men and women from Iraq. I thank MoveOn for their patriotic ad and call on Petraeus to help Bush end a war the President should have never started." - Pete Stark

Jane Hamsher at firedoglake adds this:

The only one who got this right was Hillary Clinton. She’s been on the receiving end of mock right wing outrage before, she knows how it works and she didn’t get played by the typical GOP charade that even THEY aren’t sincere about. Every word coming out of their mouths on the floor of the Senate this morning was pure santcimonious hypocrisy, dancing on the head of a pin as they tried to distinguish between this and the outrageous things it was perfectly okay to say about Abizaid or Kerry or Max Clelland. But thanks to the willingness of human Gumby dolls like Bill Richardson, Barack Obama and John Edwards who thought it best to bow down before the right wing when it gets its bluster on, the PR blitz nobody would have otherwise cared about kept gaining momentum until it reached this shocking abrogation of free speech with the help of 25 Democrats.

I should actually qualify that — it wasn’t Edwards who bagged MoveOn, he had his wife do it. I suppose that’s better somehow. Maybe not as good as Barack “I never met a fight I couldn’t duck” Obama who was there to vote on the Boxer Amendment, but couldn’t be bothered to stick around and vote against Cornyn. But close.

More from Marsh:

Hillary Clinton gets it. Even in the middle of a brutal attack launched by Rudy Giuliani, which will only get worse because of her vote today, Clinton stood up, stood proudly and cast a vote against the Cornyn charade. No doubt she remembers well when Democrats wanted to flee from Bill Clinton during the Lewinski witch hunt. No one sanctioned what her husband did, least of all her. But Hillary knew what was at stake and what Republicans were really after, so she didn't flinch, gathered herself and the Democratic party and fought back against the right-wing who was after only one thing, same as they were today.

Power.

Never give in. Never give up. And above all else know who is the real enemy. Clinton knows -- as sure as she saved Bill Clinton's presidency -- that the enemy of Democrats is not MoveOn.org. Today Clinton proved why she's the frontrunner. She left the boys in the dust.

THE COURAGEOUS 25 WHO VOTED NAY

Akaka (D-HI)

Bingaman (D-NM)

Boxer (D-CA)

Brown (D-OH)

Byrd (D-WV)

Clinton (D-NY)

Dodd (D-CT)

Durbin (D-IL)

Feingold (D-WI)

Harkin (D-IA)

Inouye (D-HI)

Kennedy (D-MA)

Kerry (D-MA)

Lautenberg (D-NJ)

Levin (D-MI)

Menendez (D-NJ)

Murray (D-WA)

Reed (D-RI)

Reid (D-NV)

Rockefeller (D-WV)

Sanders (I-VT)

Schumer (D-NY)

Stabenow (D-MI)

Whitehouse (D-RI)

Wyden (D-OR)

And finally, from The Nation: Democrats Stab MoveOn in the Back

"Memo to Democrats: you control the Congress. That means you can decide what bills come to the floor for votes--and what don't. So why, in a week where Republicans blocked the restoration of habeas corpus, voting rights for DC and adequate rest time for our troops between deployments, did you allow Republicans the opportunity to score a cheap PR stunt by approving a resolution condemning a week-old newspaper ad by Moveon.org--on the same day Republicans once again voted to keep indefinitely continuing the Iraq war?!"

Stay tuned ...