What Is Most American: John McCain or Gitmo?

B’Man: crossposted with honor at The Largest Minority, even tho I could not, for the life of me, figure out how to embed video on his blog.

Hey Rednecks!

BuelahMan here. I’m sitting in for Manila while he is toiling away in the 100 degree Las Vegas heat (but it’s a “dry” heat). It’s 100 here and a “wet” heat… actually a very unusual 75 and partly cloudy. If you haven’t heard, I’m revolting… from a Redstate, that is. But enough about this old crazy redneck.

Poor old McInsane is slippery when it comes to policy. He flips right when you expect him to flop even righter. He does so with abandon because no one in the MSM is really holding his feet to the fire. He gets by with stuff largely because the Big Media tries to cover it over with bullshit (Rev Wright, fist bumps, etc)… or they simply don’t care, while hypocritically holding others under a magnifying glass.

Is there hope? If more Patriots stand up like Dennis Kucinich did, inspiring the frightened little Bushie sheep (especially the capitulating Dems) to grow the spines necessary to hold these monsters accountable, I’ll have hope. A sure sign of change will be a real investigation into the Articles of Impeachment set forth.

I even hold hope that the slightly lesser right wing Dem, Barack Obama (who is blinding us all with his whispers and hints of hope and change) will ask the right questions of his opponent, especially regarding the conflicts and flip-flopping associated with his long, illustrious career. Let’s insist that Ralph Nader and other candidates get the chance at some debates and town hall meetings, for then I know these things will be illuminated.

With that in mind, would it be too much to ask one of you presidential wannabes to actually address one of these issues? Especially like the one that Manila pointed out to me today. It grips McCain by the short and curlies, if someone would just address this in a way that folks will see it.

Do our military bases in other lands constitute them being US property or not?

UPDATE: video change and description below.

June 12th 2008, SCOTUS ruled on the case:

BOUMEDIENE v. BUSH.

In which they ruled that the detainees in the US Naval base at Guantanamo Bay have the right to Habeas Corpus, which is the right to face your accuser on why you have been imprisoned. It’s also called The Great Writ as it’s historically been an important instrument for the safeguarding of individual freedom against arbitrary state action.

In the dissenting opinion, Justice Scalia (joined by Roberts, Alito and Thomas) insist that the US Naval base in Cuba is not on US sovereign land and therefore the Constitution and US Law does not apply. McCain agrees calling the dissenting opinion saying its “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country”.

That leads to us to –

The McCain Paradox

The Public Record: Three Part Guide to Kucinich’s Articles of Impeachment

B’Man: The Public Record is a relatively new blog whose focus is information gathering from the usually overlooked public record. They do some in-depth reporting and analysis on the politically charged events of the day. Of course, the internet has opened up many of these lines, but the more I read from folks like Elizabeth de la Vega, the more I appreciate what they are trying to do.

Elizabeth makes the case that many Americans don’t even know that Impeachment is being attempted by a patriot. When they do find out and decide to look into it, the detail can become so overbearing that people find “the allegations and citations so overwhelming they just switch off their minds.”

Like when you begin to put a child’s Christmas toy together and freak out while looking at the directions and simply start assembling shit having bolts and pieces left over when “finished”.

Please visit TPR’s site and read the entire article and track the upcoming “Parts” as Elizabeth publishes them.

Kucinich’s Articles of Impeachment: A Three-Part Guide

By Elizabeth de la Vega
The Public Record

…For the past seven years, we have watched as evidence of President Bush’s deceit, contempt of Congress and abuse of power has piled up like rank seaweed on a beach. We cannot, in this summer of 2008, simply step around it and pretend it’s not there. There is a constitutional process to follow and we must follow it. If the threat of terrorism is not a reason to disregard the constitution – and it is not – then surely neither is an election.

So I have decided to offer some help, a modest contribution in the one area I know best: the presentation of charges. It’s a Three-Part Guide to the Articles of Impeachment. There is nothing fancy here — no sarcasm, no vitriol and no cynicism. Part I is a chart that itemizes the Articles of Impeachment with a subheading and a longer description. Part II will be also a chart which itemizes U.S. and international laws that are implicated by the charges in the Articles of Impeachment. (Quite properly, not every impeachable offense is based on a specific legal violation.) In Part III, to come early next week, I will present an opening statement setting forth – just as a prosecutor would do before a trial -what the evidence would show with regard to these allegations.

Forward them around, if you would. At the very least – before we decide to ignore it –we should all clearly and unflinchingly apprehend the nature and scope of this executive misconduct and its consequent human misery and damage to our country.

Part I: http://www.pubrecord.org/docs/vega/kucinich-bush-articles-of-impeachment.pdf

Part II: Coming Sunday June 15, 2008

Part III: Coming next week

Elizabeth de la Vega is a former federal prosecutor with more than 20 years of experience. During her tenure, she was a member of the Organized Crime Strike Force and chief of the San Jose Branch of the US attorney’s office for the Northern District of California.

The author of “United States v. George W. Bush et al,” she may be contacted at ElizabethdelaVega@Verizon.net or through Speakers Clearinghouse.

Nader: Patriot Act Facts

PATRIOT Act Facts

Senator Obama
Promised to repeal Patriot Act, then voted for it. While expressing reservations, Senator Obama ultimately voted to re-authorize the PATRIOT Act in 2006. Senator Feingold, who also expressed reservations, didn’t compromise his principles and voted against the re-authorization of the PATRIOT Act.
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060216-floor_statement_2/

Senator McCain
Senator McCain voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act in 2006.

Ralph Nader
Proven consistent history standing up for the Constitution; would veto any attempts to extend the PATRIOT Act or other legislation designed to circumvent civil liberties.

War Facts
Senator Obama

Obama’s Iraq redeployment plan would leave 175,000 to 220,000 troops and mercenaries in Iraq, threatens to expand the war to other nations by putting combat forces in Kuwait and keeping the bombing of Iran on the table.
Obama will leave all leave all 140,000 U.S. mercenaries in Iraq.
Obama will leave between 35,000 to 80,000 troops in Iraq to protect U.S. interests, fight al Qaeda and train the Iraqi military.
Obama will move combat troops to Kuwait to serve as a strike force to attack inside Iraq.

Obama has pledged to the right-wing Israeli lobby that he will always keep the military option.

Obama wants to expand the U.S. military, already the biggest in the world, by 92,000 additional soldiers.
http://votersforpeace.us/press/index.php?itemid=142
http://votersforpeace.us/press/index.php?itemid=215

Senator McCain

Supports the surge strategy and continued occupation of Iraq. His goal is an “Iraq that no longer needs American troops” but no clear guidance on when this might happen is provided.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/FDEB03A7-30B0-4ECE-8E34-4C7EA83F11D8.htm

Ralph Nader
A complete, rapid, withdrawal of all U.S. military, mercenaries and corporate interests from Iraq.
Cutting the wasteful and bloated U.S. military budget which makes up 50% of U.S. discretionary spending.
Reversing U.S. Middle East policy, including a re-evaluation of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute.
Increased spending on diplomacy and the reducing the underlying causes of terrorism.

–
Nader for President 2008
P.O. Box 34103
Washington, D.C. 20043
www.votenader.org

$300 Billion Down the Tubes: Shocking Wasteful Spending on Weapons Systems | Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace | AlterNet

From Alternet:
$300 Billion Down the Tubes: Shocking Wasteful Spending on Weapons Systems

The Pentagon spends hundreds of billions of dollars on weapons systems, but our troops still aren’t getting what they need. It’s a scandal of enormous proportions that involves deceptive corporations and complacent government officials. But the biggest problem of all is that the people in Washington who could fix it continue to ignore it.

Video won’t load, so visit the link.

Nader The ‘Spoiler’: As Much As I Agree With You, Please Don’t Run

June 13, 2008
www.votenader.org
www.officialnaderstore.com

2008 Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader discusses a remark made to him by a fellow alumnus at a recent Princeton reunion.

Watch the video here, read the transcript below.

Do you think Ralph Nader should run? If so, let him know now with your contribution. (Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.) - The Nader Team

****

I was at my Princeton reunion the other day, and a young alumnus came up to me – he was very kind – and he said “You know, I really like what you’re doing – I like what you did – but please don’t run.”

I said “Do you realize what you are saying?”

And he said “Yes, I said please don’t run.”

I said “You’re telling me not to use my First Amendment rights of speech, assembly, and petition inside the electoral arena. You’re telling me to shut up. Are you aware of what you’re saying?”

He said “I understand, I understand, I like what you’re doing, but please don’t run.”

So I went through and I said “Well, would you tell those voters instead of trying to determine which one was worse between the Democrats and the Whigs, the two major parties in the 19th century, and instead cut out and voted for the Liberty Party, which was the anti-slavery party – would you say to those candidates, ‘Don’t run’?”

And he sort of paused.

And I said “How about the people who refused to go least-worst between the Republicans and Democrats on women’s suffrage? Would you tell those candidates ‘don’t run’? What do you say to that?”

And he paused.

And I took it up to date and I said “Would you tell Buchanan not to run?”

And he said “I understand what you are saying, but please don’t run.”

And I said “You know, unwittingly, you are engaging in a politically bigoted statement. Because you can oppose, and you can support, any candidates you want. But when you are saying to someone ‘don’t run’ you are saying to someone ‘do not speak, do not petition, do not assemble inside the electoral arena.’”

Now I’m saying this because I’m sure you’ve had these conversations with people. Look at the word spoiler. Spoiler is a contemptuous word of political bigotry. They do not accuse George W. Bush of being the spoiler in 2000, and last I heard he got more votes than I did, vis-a-vis Al Gore. It’s only the independent and third parties that are called spoilers.

And think of the hubris here – these two parties have spoiled our elections, they’ve spoiled our government, they’ve spoiled our politics – and to have the temerity to say to someone who wants to reform the process that they are spoilers – they have no sense of humor – I mean, how do you satire satire?

- Ralph Nader, New York City, May 31, 2008 – Watch the video | Comment on this blog

“Ralph Nader should run for President so we all have a better choice in November. Please accept my support!“

Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.

“God Save Us From American Peace and Liberty”

I’m no fan of the music (I suppose one must be born there to dig it), but the words are a perfectly apt description of America. Like it or not, the rest of the world is beginning to hate us (they already distrust us and are scared in most of the world).

It is our policies driven by the military industrial complex which has controlled the neocon agenda in wars that causes this.

But let me throw something at you… what if the rest of the world becomes so scared that they team up against us? What if the rest of the world decides that the only way to stop the carnage of America (the illegal agressor) is to ban together and fight us?

Sure, some of you foolish Bushies will say, “Bring ‘em on!”, but that is only an idiot’s brain in action.

If I lived elsewhere and witnessed what we have done, especially in the last 7 years, I would be very worried. Our country has become a monster and most rednecks are oblivious to this fact.

h/t BrassCheckTV

Buelahnomics: Why The US Has Gone Broke

B’Man: You hear me discussbitch about ‘Big Money’ and ‘Big Military’ and all the other ‘Bigs” listed over in the category section. These ‘Bigs’ are the owners of America and what drives everything our government does and is beholden to. What was once ‘for the people’ & ‘by the people’ is now for the Ultra rich and their new corporate citizenship mentality.

However, one of the biggest ‘Bigs’ we have is ‘Big Military’ (aka the military industrial complex) and how this ‘Big’ is probably the leading cause for our country’s demise from ‘leader’ of the ‘free’ world to ‘enforcer’ of the ‘invaded’ world. As with each and every other empire throughout history, this incessant drive towards more military spending as some economic sustaining entity, will simply cause our financial destruction. Essentially, we end up spending money on stuff that never gets used and take away from our own infrastructure and manufacturing base.

As a redneck, I can’t explain it completely, but I do read alot about the subject and found this article that breaks this down as well as any I have read in some time. It is worthy of a full read, but I want to point out some key points for a rednecks education…

Why the U.S. Has Gone Broke

by Chalmers Johnson

…There are three broad aspects to the U.S. debt crisis.

First, in the current fiscal year (2008) we are spending insane amounts of money on “defense” projects that bear no relation to the national security of the U.S. We are also keeping the income tax burdens on the richest segment of the population at strikingly low levels.

Second, we continue to believe that we can compensate for the accelerating erosion of our base and our loss of jobs to foreign countries through massive military expenditures — “military Keynesianism” (which I discuss in detail in my book Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic).

By that, I mean the mistaken belief that public policies focused on frequent wars, huge expenditures on weapons and munitions, and large standing armies can indefinitely sustain a wealthy capitalist economy. The opposite is actually true.

Third, in our devotion to militarism (despite our limited resources), we are failing to invest in our social infrastructure and other requirements for the long-term health of the U.S. These are what economists call opportunity costs, things not done because we spent our money on something else. Our public education system has deteriorated alarmingly. We have failed to provide health care to all our citizens and neglected our responsibilities as the world’s number one polluter. Most important, we have lost our competitiveness as a manufacturer for civilian needs, an infinitely more efficient use of scarce resources than arms manufacturing.

B’Man: Our country’s elite, who are in government or control those that are, have grown to be so focused on protecting their stuff that we have insane tax codes in place that are ruining many facets of social assistance. But, more than that, we have completely turned into the “complex” of building our economy from weapons and thus becoming implementers of war and carnage (while still calling ourselves “Christian”, I might add).

Fiscal disaster

It is virtually impossible to overstate the profligacy of what our government spends on the military. The Department of Defense’s planned expenditures for the fiscal year 2008 are larger than all other nations’ military budgets combined. The supplementary budget to pay for the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not part of the official defense budget, is itself larger than the combined military budgets of Russia and China.

Defense-related spending for fiscal 2008 will exceed $1 trillion for the first time in history. The U.S. has become the largest single seller of arms and munitions to other nations on Earth. Leaving out President Bush’s two on-going wars, defense spending has doubled since the mid-1990s. The defense budget for fiscal 2008 is the largest since the second world war. Before we try to break down and analyze this gargantuan sum, there is one important caveat. Figures on defense spending are notoriously unreliable. The numbers released by the Congressional Reference Service and the Congressional Budget Office do not agree with each other. Robert Higgs, senior fellow for political economy at the Independent Institute, says: “A well-founded rule of thumb is to take the Pentagon’s (always well publicized) basic budget total and double it.” Even a cursory reading of newspaper articles about the Department of Defense will turn up major differences in statistics about its expenses.

Some 30-40% of the defense budget is ‘black, ‘” meaning that these sections contain hidden expenditures for classified projects. There is no possible way to know what they include or whether their total amounts are accurate. There are many reasons for this budgetary sleight-of-hand -including a desire for secrecy on the part of the president, the secretary of defense, and the military-industrial complex – - but the chief one is that members of Congress, who profit enormously from defense jobs and pork-barrel projects in their districts, have a political interest in supporting the Department of Defense. In 1996, in an attempt to bring accounting standards within the executive branch closer to those of the civilian economy, Congress passed the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act. It required all federal agencies to hire outside auditors to review their books and release the results to the public. Neither the Department of Defense, nor the Department of Homeland Security, has ever complied. Congress has complained, but not penalized either department for ignoring the law. All numbers released by the Pentagon should be regarded as suspect. In discussing the fiscal 2008 defense budget, as released on 7 February 2007, I have been guided by two experienced and reliable analysts: William D Hartung of the New America Foundation’s Arms and Security Initiative and Fred Kaplan, defense correspondent for Slate.org. They agree that the Department of Defense requested $481.4bn for salaries, operations (except in Iraq and Afghanistan), and equipment.

They also agree on a figure of $141.7bn for the “supplemental” budget to fight the global war on terrorism – - that is, the two on-going wars that the general public may think are actually covered by the basic Pentagon budget. The Department of Defense also asked for an extra $93.4bn to pay for hitherto unmentioned war costs in the remainder of 2007 and, most creatively, an additional “allowance” (a new term in defense budget documents) of $50bn to be charged to fiscal year 2009. This makes a total spending request by the Department of Defense of $766.5bn. But there is much more. In an attempt to disguise the true size of the U.S. military empire, the government has long hidden major military-related expenditures in departments other than Defense. For example, $23.4bn for the Department of Energy goes towards developing and maintaining nuclear warheads; and $25.3bn in the Department of State budget is spent on foreign military assistance (primarily for Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Republic, Egypt and Pakistan).

B’Man: With the gas prices at $4.00/gallon and are GOING to rise more, we are in for a very fast fall, folks. The people in control don’t want you to know how close to devastation we are, for when America realizes it, she will shut totally down, causing even more failure within the Big Money system.

Think about how much fuel the Iraqi invasion requires while the price is continually rising (and I would bet, highly elevated prices). Keep in mind that the $4 mark is based off of $90.00/barrel of oil and we just went to around $138/barrel. When the prices catch up, we will be, at least, at $5.00/gallon and likely to be around $6.00/gallon before the summer ends. People are so slow to bitch to those who can help. We bitch at each other about it and shrug, “What are we gonna do?” Then we get into the car and drive off, forgetting that doom is impending.

But it isn’t just us rednecks that can’t drive far or even afford to drive to work any longer. The cost of fuel for food delivery will skyrocket. The cost of fuel to run equipment to gather the crops will skyrocket (making groceries skyrocket even more than we have seen).

People that need to fly will be less able to afford it, even if the airlines make it without total bankruptcy (several have already gone bust), for their costs are skyrocketing, as well. All forms of transportation will skyrocket, for they can’t bear the entire fuel burden when they are so competitive to begin with.

Plastics are made of petro-chemicals, so even packaging and everything that is made of plastic will skyrocket.

So, why has the US gone broke? Because we are run and controlled by corporate interests protected by those we elected who get most of their campaign contributions from these same entities that run the country. GE owns the media which lies to us about the truth AND is heavy into Military and nuclear. Same for others. Vested interests cause them to lie and keep silent about the lies of the administration.

They will pillage what they can… to hell with us, the real Americans.