Here’s a clip from a recent issue of the Guardian on the fallout over our filibuster debate:
President Bush’s drive for absolute power has momentarily stalled. In a single coup, he planned to take over all the institutions of government. By crushing the traditions of the Senate he would pack the courts, especially the supreme court, with lockstep ideologues. Sheer force would prevail. But just as his blitzkrieg reached the outskirts of his objective, he was struck by a mutiny. Within the span of 24 hours he lost control not only of the Senate but temporarily of the House of Representatives, which was supposed to be regimented by unquestioned loyalty. Now he prepares to launch a counterattack – against the dissident elements of his own party…
The day after Bush was frustrated by Republicans in the Senate, 50 Republicans in the House deserted him on the issue of stem cell research. His policy limiting scientific work is a sop to the religious right that views the stem cell question as an extension of abortion. Debate in the House was marshalled by Republican majority leader Tom DeLay, who argued that Bush’s policy must be supported because “Jesus of Nazareth” began life as an embryo. Bush promised to veto the stem cell bill passed with massive Republican defections, the irony of his opposition to the filibuster unmentioned.
Q: Describe a day in the life of average citizens living in this post-cheap-oil epoch.
A: They are going to be living in a period of turbulence and political vicissitude. Industrial farming is going to fail by increments and we are going to have to grow more food closer to home. Agriculture is going to become much more central to the American way of life and economy and going to occupy a much larger percentage of jobs. The places that will be successful will be the smaller towns situated near viable agricultural land.
There is going to be this huge new class of people in America who I call the “formerly middle class” and they’re going to be really ticked off and bewildered about why they were deprived of their entitlements to the American Dream. The easy-motoring lifestyle will be unaffordable for the masses, so the 21st century is going to be much more about staying where you are and much less about being in motion all the time.
Q: Are you predicting that there will be an elite class that is still privy to all of the conveniences of the cheap-oil era?
A: There will be activities like flying that only the elite can participate in. You are going to see the aviation industry dramatically contract because it relies so heavily on fuel prices. You are going to start to see real political grievance over motoring becoming an increasingly elite activity. Let’s say a third of the public can’t participate in the motoring system at all. They may resent paying taxes to maintain this tremendous amount of highway infrastructure. The interstate highway system is actually very vulnerable — once cracks and potholes start, the whole thing starts to fall apart very rapidly. So that could inhibit the mobility of the elite as well.
Taking a break from reading left-leaning political blogs just now, I decided to spend a few minutes as I often do, cruising the web looking for evidence tying Paul Lynde to the death of a young male companion in 1965. And, in the process of putting the pieces together, I came across this mention of the actor’s drinking, and the fact that it had led to his being fired from Hollywood Squares… Here’s a clip from the TV Party bio of Paul Lynde:
Lynde was fired from the long-running game show in 1979 for drinking too much and being belligerent on the set. On several occasions he had to be forcibly removed from the set because of his outrageous tirades, lashing out angrily at audience members and contestants.
So, here’s my question for you… Have you ever heard about footage of such tirades existing? I would pay real money if someone could provide a tape… This, I’m sad to say, has become my new life’s mission. (Stopping the Fascist takeover of America was just too hard.)
Over the last few years he’s said and done some things that I haven’t agreed with, but I have to give Ralph Nader credit for stepping up to the podium today, pointing to the Downing Street Memo, and calling for the impeachment of President Bush. Here’s a clip from Nader’s statement:
The impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution, should be part of mainstream political discourse.
Minutes from a summer 2002 meeting involving British Prime Minister Tony Blair reveal that the Bush administration was ”fixing” the intelligence to justify invading Iraq. US intelligence used to justify the war demonstrates repeatedly the truth of the meeting minutes — evidence was thin and needed fixing.
President Clinton was impeached for perjury about his sexual relationships. Comparing Clinton’s misbehavior to a destructive and costly war occupation launched in March 2003 under false pretenses in violation of domestic and international law certainly merits introduction of an impeachment resolution…
The president and vice president have artfully dodged the central question: ”Did the administration mislead us into war by manipulating and misstating intelligence concerning weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to Al Qaeda, suppressing contrary intelligence, and deliberately exaggerating the danger a contained, weakened Iraq posed to the United States and its neighbors?”
If this is answered affirmatively Bush and Cheney have committed ”high crimes and misdemeanors.” It is time for Congress to investigate the illegal Iraq war as we move toward the third year of the endless quagmire that many security experts believe jeopardizes US safety by recruiting and training more terrorists. A Resolution of Impeachment would be a first step. Based on the mountains of fabrications, deceptions, and lies, it is time to debate the ”I” word.
It’s about time someone stepped up to say the obvious. If lying about getting your dick sucked was a legitimate cause for initiating impeachment proceedings, then surely lying to the American people about the justification for taking their sons and daughters to war is legitimate cause. I know it may be political suicide given the stranglehold the Republican party seems to have on American politics today, but this is a conversation that needs to be had, and the Democrats have to find the strength to bring it up.