The Democrats Gloat Thread

Of course, it demonstrates their imperial hubris and that they think they are indeed above the law.

Join me in celebrating Condi Rice: A Fabulous Republican

Saying the secretary of state is "America's face to the world," Bush said the international community, in Rice, will see the "strength, grace and decency" of the United States.

Asking for quick Senate confirmation, Bush added: "The nation needs her."

______________________________

The Republicans!! Picking the most brilliant accomplished women to lead the world!!!!


<dazzling musical arrangement>

Bio: Condoleezza Rice
Monday, November 15, 2004

WASHINGTON ?- Key details about National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice:

NAME: Condoleezza Rice.

AGE-BIRTH DATE: 50; Nov. 14, 1954.

BIRTHPLACE: Birmingham, Ala.

EDUCATION: Bachelor of arts, political science, University of Denver, 1974; master of arts, University of Notre Dame, 1975; Ph.D., Graduate School of International Studies, University of Denver, 1981.

EXPERIENCE: National security adviser, National Security Council, 2001-present; Hoover Senior Fellow and professor of political science, Stanford University, 1981-1999; provost, Stanford University, 1993-99; director-senior director, Soviet and East European Affairs, National Security Council, special assistant to the president for national security affairs, 1989-1991; special assistant to the director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1986.

BOOKS: Co-author, "Germany Unified and Europe Transformed," 1995; co-author, "The Gorbachev Era," 1986; author, "Uncertain Allegiance ?- The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army," 1984.

FAMILY: Single.

QUOTE: "Knowing what we know about the difficulties of our own history, knowing the history of Alabama and Mississippi and Tennessee, we should be humble in singing freedom's praise, but our voice should never waiver in speaking out on the side of those who seek freedom." ?- Commencement Speech at Vanderbilt University, May 13, 2004.


_________________

Wooo-hooo!! Tell it sister!!!

Condaliar Rice, fabulous all right, in the true sense of the word.


fab·u·lous Audio pronunciation of "fabulous" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fby-ls)
adj.

1. Barely credible;

Condi Rice: Brilliant, Uniquely Qualified, No Personal Agenda
Written by Isaac Strahl
Friday, November 19, 2004


With the appointment of Condoleezza Rice to secretary of state, this is certain, writes Ben Johnson: When she speaks, it will be as though the president himself were speaking. Unlike Colin Powell, Rice does not have her own agenda and foreign leaders will not have to disceren whether what they are hearing is the opinion of the president or the secretary.

In Johnson's opnion, Rice is brilliant, determined, and a good choice for this perilous time. We have excerpted the column below, with a link to the full article following.

''Condoleeza Rice is uniquely qualified to become Secretary of State. Although lacking Colin Powell's popularity and good PR, Rice's steady, clear-headed foreign policy advice helped the Bush administration chart a new course through the darkest days of recent history. In the wake of 9/11, her NSC helped draw up the doctrine of pre-emption. When the reconstruction of Iraq seemed to bog down, Bush turned it over to her watch. Mediating the deep ideological rifts within the Cabinet, Rice has forged a genuinely respectful relationship with Powell--and his opponents.

''For her efforts, Condi Rice has been branded a 'house slave' by Stalinist Harry Belafonte, attacked by the Clinton-allied Center for American Progress, and even been depicted in pornographic 'art' at Lehigh University. . . .''
_________________________

That dirty Harry!! What a psycho!!!!!

link

Oy!

For Americans troubled by the activities of some who, in their eagerness to damage the Presidency and administration for political purposes, would hamstring the government's ability to do meaningful surveillance, the following is a fairly concise argument for the President's point of view:

Jonathan Gurwitz: 1978 surveillance act hinders 2006 security

Web Posted: 02/19/2006 12:00 AM CST
San Antonio Express-News

Where is the safest place in the world for Osama bin Laden to hide while continuing to direct the terrorist plots of al-Qaida? The United States.
If you think that's an exaggeration, consider what Gen. Michael Hayden, the former director of the National Security Agency, told the House Intelligence Committee in April 2000.

To illustrate the limitations imposed by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ?- passed by Congress in 1978 ?- Hayden cited a Saudi terror leader whose name was then not widely known: "If ... Osama bin Laden is walking across the peace bridge from Niagara Falls, Ontario, to Niagara Falls, New York, as he gets to the New York side, he is an American person and my agency must respect his rights against unreasonable search and seizure."

Hayden's testimony about FISA six years ago proved to be lethally prescient. When FBI agents in Minneapolis arrested a French-born man of Moroccan descent named Zacarias Moussaoui during the summer of 2001, the Justice Department declined to issue a FISA warrant to search his computer files.

Moussaoui had come to the attention of U.S. law enforcement due to a tip from French intelligence about his connection to Islamic terrorists, and for the curious fact that he expressed an interest to a Minnesota flight school in learning only how to fly a commercial airliner, not how to take off or land.

In 1999, the NSA began monitoring a cell phone number in Yemen that served as a switchboard for al-Qaida. Among the callers who connected to this switchboard was a "Khalid" in the United States. The NSA dropped surveillance of the caller for fear of violating FISA provisions on domestic spying. Khalid turned out to be Khalid al-Mihdhar, one of the 9-11 hijackers who took over American Airlines Flight 77 and flew it into the Pentagon.

Traveling overseas ?- for instance, to a terrorist conclave in Malaysia in 2000 ?- al-Mihdhar and fellow hijacker Nawaf al-Hazmi were under CIA surveillance. Back in the United States, however, FBI lawyers were reluctant to initiate a criminal investigation due to concerns about breaching the FISA wall between domestic and foreign intelligence.

Here's what the 9-11 commission had to say about FISA:

"The 'wall' between criminal and intelligence investigations apparently caused agents to be less aggressive than they might otherwise have been in pursuing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) surveillance powers in counterterrorism investigations.

"Moreover, the FISA approval process involved multiple levels of review, which also discouraged agents from using such surveillance. Many agents also told us that the process for getting FISA packages approved at FBI headquarters and the Department of Justice was incredibly lengthy and inefficient."

The institutional aversion to FISA warrants may have lessened, the wall separating domestic and foreign intelligence may have been lowered since the fall of 2001. But a law crafted 28 years ago ?- before disposable cellular phones became as ubiquitous as bubble gum at convenience stores, before masked e-mails from anonymizing Web portals could even be conceived ?- is insufficient to the task of protecting the nation against 21st-century terrorism.

"The revolution in telecommunications technology has extended the actual impact of the FISA regime far beyond what Congress could have anticipated in 1978," Hayden told the National Press Club last month. "And I don't think anyone can make the claim that the FISA statute is optimized to deal with or prevent a 9-11."

It may very well have been politically prudent and, less possibly, constitutionally necessary for President Bush to go to Congress five years ago to amend FISA and expedite the surveillance of communications between individuals in the United States and suspected or known foreign terrorists.

If the administration had done so, however, does anyone doubt that congressional media darlings would have made it headline news? And then, as now, does anyone believe the terrorists wouldn't be listening to what our lawmakers say about what our country is doing to thwart them?
SOURCE

Democrats wiretap

The FBI and Martin Luther King

Martin Luther King was never himself a Communist?-far from it. But the FBI's wiretapping of King was precipitated by his association with Stanley Levison, a man with reported ties to the Communist Party. Newly available documents reveal what the FBI actually knew?-the vast extent of Levinson's Party activities
by David J. Garrow

In October 10, 1963, U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy committed what is widely viewed as one of the most ignominious acts in modern American history: he authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigation to begin wiretapping the telephones of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. Kennedy believed that one of King's closest advisers was a top-level member of the American Communist Party, and that King had repeatedly misled Administration officials about his ongoing close ties with the man. Kennedy acted reluctantly, and his order remained secret until May of 1968, just a few weeks after King's assassination and a few days before Kennedy's own. But the FBI onslaught against King that followed Kennedy's authorization remains notorious, and the stains on the reputations of everyone involved are indelible.

An oldie, but a GOODIE.

Pelosi pressed for trip records

By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

House Republicans yesterday called on Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to provide documentation to prove that a Washington lobbyist firm did not pay for a trip she and other Democrats took to Puerto Rico in 2001.
"We feel that such lingering questions undermine the integrity of the institution and we hope [the questions] will be cleared up as soon as possible," wrote Republican Reps. Patrick T. McHenry of North Carolina and Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia. The Washington Times reported earlier this week that Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Ohio Democrat and member of the House ethics committee, listed a registered lobbyist as the trip's sponsor. House rules prohibit registered lobbyists from paying for travel by members.

On travel disclosure forms filed with the House clerk, Mrs. Pelosi and others on the trip listed a group called Todo Puerto Rico con Vieques as its sponsor.
After the discrepancy was made public, Mrs. Jones amended her travel disclosure form to match those of Mrs. Pelosi and other travelers. A spokeswoman in Mrs. Jones' office blamed the conflicting information on "human error" but declined to provide proof that the trip was paid for by Todo Puerto Rico con Vieques, rather than D.C. lobbyist Smith, Dawson & Andrews.
Mrs. Pelosi also refused to provide any such documentation, and testily dismissed questions yesterday about the matter.
"There's no discrepancy in the records on my trip," the California Democrat said. "So that's all I can answer for."
[..]
The questions also come after months of claims against Majority Leader Tom DeLay, accused of accepting a trip paid for by a lobbyist. Mr DeLay and the nonprofit group he listed as the trip's sponsor insist the lobbyist did not pay the bill.
Mrs. Pelosi has called for a full investigation into that matter, which is an inconsistency, say Mr. McHenry and Mr. Westmoreland.
"If you are serious that the mere allegation that a lobbyist paid for member travel warrants a full ethics investigation, it would seem that a member actually disclosing it as fact would more than merit it," the Republicans wrote.
"We would hope that you would come forward with any and all documentation your office has proving that in fact the group, Todo Puerto Rico con Vieques, initiated and paid for your trip," Mr. McHenry and Mr. Westmoreland added. "Ms. Jones' disclosures that a lobbyist in fact paid for it, and her subsequent statement that the lobbying firm handled the logistics, has created an appearance that the true source of the funds may not actually be Todo Puerto Rico con Vieques." Jose Paralitici, who organized the group to oppose the U.S. Navy bombing range in Vieques, yesterday returned a telephone message left earlier in the week by The Times. Mr. Paralitici said he operates the group from his home and that the group paid for the 2001 trips.
Mr. Paralitici said he hadn't spoken to anyone in Congress this week but that he was volunteering the information after coming across The Times story on the Internet. He said the money to pay the more than $8,000 in travel bills came from "a lot of donations."

___________________

Have they reopened the inquiry into Pelosi's hypocrisy? Have you ever noticed that crazy frozen, fake smile across her face? Hmmm.

Nancy is protested by her contituents.



That winning smile just doesn't work with some people.

Yes. Democrats actuallly allow in to speechs citizens who hold/voice opposing views.

Bush's consistantly low approval ratings, now at a 29% low, with no bump after the Smite of the Union address is all that's needed. Condeleeza Rice has been pretty much in the background in the news because she isn't really doing anything. Name three positive accomplishments in the past year.

BTW, this back-and-forth spamming is akin to a schoolyard squabble.

What a thread! I mean to say that with sarcasm. Has anyone read the latest Harper's Magazine and the article by Lewis Lapham and why Bush should be impeached? I know Latham has, but I hightly recommend to our "rightie" friends who think extolling Condi Rice (liar like the rest of the admin and never admits mistakes) is a way at getting back at those who would like to see our constitution again along with checks and balances. And Nancy Pelosi? Look at Dennis Hastart....good grief! He and Frist couldn't reform the fat hogs if they tried. Hastart is one.

Well, I was not allowed into a Clinton speech here in Albuquerque because I was wearing a small GOP ribbon. And I was not allowed into a second Clinton speech here in in Albuquerque because I wouldn't hold a Clinton/Gore campaign sign. And I was not allowed a ticket to go hear Hillary at all since her audience was strictly limited to Democrat fatcat conributors.

It was widely publicized that Clinton required Vietnam vets opposed to his presence to be cordoned off 300 yards away while he did his photo op at the Vietnam Memorial.

So, I think it's safe to say the Democrats are no more virtuous than is the GOP on that score.

WHAT??? Democrats are evil, too??? They aren't wonderful godlike creatures, who let the opposition into their soirees???

Hmmmm.

LW-- You're right about the back and forth. Blatham has been doing it for months. He's done it with such consistancy and fervor, I thought I should try it. Haven't quite decided why he's so crazy about it, but I'll give it a few more months before I decide.

So incredibly naive.

There's a difference between cut-and-paste and links to relevant material to spamming -- seems like some have a problem understanding the difference. It would be an improvement to see written opinion of members supported by reliable sources.

I'm with you Lightwizard!

Like this, LW?