BlingBling

Currently the District is subject to all tax laws, and pays a higher than average tax per capita, although unrepresented in the national legislature. Having representation in the House will give District cititzens the power to better control its future. The District representative would be to introduce and earmark legislation that better serves the interests of its citizens. In addition, the District representative would be able to vote against legislation in Committee and in the Roll Call. Furthermore, having this type of power will allow the District to make deals with other Representatives in the legislature to get bills passed. Having a voting representative should be our legitimate Right. We are America's "Last Colony."

This is going to make a great movie

I bet that is what the English said about American Colonist making a stink about taxation without proper representation in Parliament. Rees, I think you would make a good candidate for the Flat Earth Society. http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskop...arthsociety.htm

The Republicans outmaneuvered the Democrats again in blocking a Senate debate on a mildly worded non-binding resolution criticizing George W. Bush's Iraq War escalation. At issue is a resolution crafted by the top two members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Democrat Carl Levin and Republican John Warner, that "disagrees" with the president's plan to send 21,500 more combat troops to Iraq. Senator Warner voted against his own plan. The White House got to him. America has spoken .. Get us out of Iraq .. No one believes the Bush/Cheney/Rice Admin. No one trusts them. It is clear now that they have lied their way into this. They cannot blame the Iraqis for failing, the whole blame belongs to them. Here is copy of the Resolution. You decide for yourself.

Joe Biden is making big news today. In an interview with The New York Observer, Biden unloads on Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards, offering scathing criticism of all three and their plans for Iraq. Here's Biden on Edwards: "I don’t think John Edwards knows what the heck he is talking about." And here's Biden on Hillary's Iraq plan: "nothing but disaster." To our knowledge, this is the first time in Campaign 2008 that a Dem has directly engaged Clinton, and we have a feeling Clinton's rapid-response operation is going to be on overdrive today. Some excerpts of Biden's assault on the three Dems after the jump. http://www.observer.com/20070205/20070205_...newsstory1.html

Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) said that she was encouraged by a very good meeting with Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) on scheduling congressional consideration of H.R. 328, the District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act. Norton told the leaders that her request for a mark-up in February and floor consideration no later than March would also benefit the calendar, which will fill quickly with appropriations and committee business by early spring. The congressional calendar is lean now because committees are just being organized and have not had time to have the hearings necessary to develop significant bills. Hoyer agreed on a March goal, but said that meetings would be necessary with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), as well, to get final agreement. A number of issues were discussed at the meeting which the Congresswoman believes are already dealt with in the bill or can be addressed without difficulty. She spent four years addressing Democratic leadership concerns about the bill, which Speaker Pelosi co-sponsored in the last Congress. Norton said that she was prepared to engage in "the same careful problem-solving effort to get the bill to the floor by March." The Congresswoman said that increasing anxiety in the District about any significant delay in the bill concerns the uniqueness of the Utah-D.C. scenario and the approaching census, which will remove this unique bipartisan opportunity. Analysts report that it is highly unlikely that there will soon again be a Republican district like Utah that data shows is definitely due the next seat, willing to be paired with D.C. Utah has nursed almost 10 years of resentment at missing out on a new seat and felt so strongly that the state took the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court. Congress has never increased representation without requiring political balance, most recently in the admissions of Hawaii and Alaska to the Union. Norton said she was confident that the longstanding, high profile Democratic support of D.C. voting rights would bear fruit this year for a seat in the 110th Congress. "I know I speak for the people of my city when I say how deeply we have appreciated the unfailing Democratic support for our rights, from party platforms and presidential leadership to congressional bills and assistance here of all kinds," she said. The Congresswoman said that while her efforts in the Congress are expected, Mayor Adrian Fenty has offered important leadership in channeling the concerns of city residents in the recent announcement of his "Campaign for the D.C. Vote Now." In subsequent conversations, she said the Mayor told her that the first effort in his campaign would be the rally and lobby day he would lead with DC Vote and the civil rights coalition on February 15th.

I am surprised that the main stream media has not paid attention to Resolution H. Res. 78 was adopted 226-191 on Jan. 24, 2007 (roll call #57) by the House of Representatives. Adopted was a rules change to allow several non-members to vote with members of the House of Representatives when the chamber meets as a Committee of the Whole. The new privileges were given to delegates from four U.S. territories and the District of Columbia. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c110...emp/~c1107rfWsO

Now I understand

I agree that we need more upscale stores in DC. But, we have Dupont Circle, Union Station, Mazza Gallery, China Town, and Georgetown that have pretty decent retail stores. We have several Independent movie theaters, two Imax theaters, a handful of commercial theaters, and of course Uptown. As for the performing arts we have the Atlas Performing Arts Center, Capitol Hill Arts Workshop, DC Improv, National Theatre, Arena Stage, Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company, Warner Theatre, Shakespeare Theatre, Studio Theatre, Ford's Theatre, Cramton Auditorium, Theater J, Lincoln Theatre, The Capitol Steps, The Kennedy Center and a others I do not know about. The difference between DC and other cities is that we do not have a defined Arts District. New York has Broadway. But, DC's theatre's are quite spread out. As for industries. DC has government, tourism, hi tech, security, lobby and commerce. Thank Christ O'Mighty we are not a city filled with Smokestacks. Have you ever driven through Newark? It stinks.

I feel sorry for you Slick. DC has alot of culture, but not the type you like. You should move to Puerto Rico and leave the fight to people that care.

In an ongoing lawsuit with the American Civil Liberties Union, the CIA has filed a declaration arguing that the agency should not be compelled to release two Justice Department memos discussing interrogation methods and a presidential order concerning the CIA’s authorization to set up detention facilities outside the United States. “The CIA’s declaration uses national security as a pretext for withholding evidence that high-level government officials in all likelihood authorized abusive techniques that amount to torture,” said ACLU attorney Amrit Singh. “This declaration is especially disturbing because it suggests that unlawful interrogation techniques cleared by the Justice Department for use by the CIA still remain in effect. The American public has a right to know how the government is treating its prisoners.” One of the documents is described as a “14-page memorandum dated 17 September 2001 from President Bush to the Director of the CIA pertaining to the CIA’s authorization to detain terrorists.” According to the brief, of the 14 pages, 12 pages are “a notification memorandum” from the president to the National Security Council regarding a “clandestine intelligence activity.” The ACLU said this revelation raises questions regarding the extent to which Condoleezza Rice was involved in establishing the CIA detention program as National Security Advisor. In its declaration, the CIA also says that the Bush memo is so “Top Secret” that National Security Council officials created a “special access program” governing access to the document. It states that “the name of the special access program is itself classified SECRET,” meaning that the CIA believes that the disclosure of the program’s name “could be expected to result in serious danger to the nation’s security.” The other two documents are legal memoranda prepared for the CIA by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. One is an 18-page legal memorandum dated August 1, 2002 “advising the CIA regarding interrogation methods it may use against al Qaeda members.” It includes information “regarding potential interrogation methods and the context in which their use was contemplated.” It also discuses “alternative interrogation methods,” a phrase that was echoed by President Bush in a September 2006 speech promoting the Military Commissions Act. According to news reports, interrogation methods specifically authorized by the undisclosed Justice Department memo and used by the CIA include “waterboarding,” a technique meant to induce the perception of drowning, and the use of “stress positions.” The ACLU said that the CIA’s declaration suggests that the August 1, 2002 memo remains in effect. In particular, the CIA argues that public disclosure of the methods cleared by the Justice Department would allow terrorists “to resist cooperation.” The second Office of Legal Counsel document being withheld is a “31-page undated, unsigned, draft legal memorandum…that interprets the Convention Against Torture.” According to the CIA, the document is a “preliminary” version of an August 1, 2002 memo prepared for Alberto Gonzales by Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee. The CIA said it is withholding the document on attorney work-product and “deliberative process” grounds, noting that disclosure of the draft would permit the public to compare versions and “identify the similarities and differences between the draft and final legal documents.” The final Bybee memorandum contended that abuse does not rise to the level of torture under U.S. law unless it inflicts pain “equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.” After public outcry, that memorandum was rescinded by the administration in December 2004. The CIA previously claimed that it could neither deny nor confirm the mere existence of the documents without jeopardizing national security. But the agency backed away from that claim after President Bush acknowledged in his September speech that the CIA does in fact detain and interrogate terrorism suspects overseas. “Through these memos, the president and Office of Legal Counsel created a legal framework that was specifically intended to allow the CIA to violate both U.S. and international law,” said Jameel Jaffer, Deputy Director of the ACLU’s National Security Program. “While national security sometimes requires secrecy, it is increasingly clear that these documents are being kept secret not for national security reasons but for political ones.” The documents discussed in the CIA’s declaration have been the subject of Congressional interest as well. In a November 16, 2006 letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Senator Patrick Leahy requested these among other documents, and also sought clarification from the Justice Department on whether the August 1, 2002 interrogation techniques memo has been modified or withdrawn since 2002. In a letter dated December 22, 2006, the Justice Department refused to release the documents to Senator Leahy and did not deny that the August 1, 2002 interrogation techniques memo remains in effect. The CIA declaration is online at: www.aclu.org/ pdfs/safefree/20070110/ cia_dorn_declaration_items_1_29_61.pdf The ACLU also released today Defense Department declarations purporting to explain why the department is withholding numerous other documents related to prisoner abuse. Those declarations are available online at: www.aclu.org/torturefoia To date, more than 100,000 pages of government documents have been released in response to the ACLU’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. The ACLU has been posting these documents online at: www.aclu.org/torturefoia Attorneys in the FOIA case are Lawrence Lustberg and Melanca Clark of the New Jersey-based law firm Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione, P.C.; Jaffer, Singh and Judy Rabinovitz of the ACLU; Arthur Eisenberg and Beth Haroules of the New York Civil Liberties Union; and Bill Goodman and Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

People captured Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) trip to a Hawaiian beach New Year's Day. His photo appears next to those of Penelope Cruz and Hugh Jackman. For those of you who don't know that "jump the shark" means the media has run out of interesting and relevant things to say about Obama and have resorted to this, well, now you know.

ExxonMobil chairman and CEO Rex Tillerson has promised investors that it would "soften" its public image on global warming, but made clear that it would not actually be changing its basic position. Fadel Gheit, an oil analyst who was at the meeting with Tillerson, noted, "Although the tone has changed, the substance remains the same." Tillerson also attacked Royal Society in Britain, stating it had "inaccurately and unfairly" depicted Exxon as a climate change skeptic. Exxon told the Guardian that it plans to work on explaining better its basic position on global warming: "Greenhouse gas emissions are one of the factors that contribute to climate change. This is an extremely complex issue but even with the scientific uncertainties, the risk (of global warming) is so great that it justifies taking action." But Exxon's record shows anything but action on climate change. According to a recent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, Exxon has "funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science." The big-oil front group the Competitive Enterprise Institute has received $1.6 million from Exxon since 1998, using the funding to distort global warming research and attack any meaningful action to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

Tomorrow night at 9 p.m. EST, President Bush will address the nation and announce an escalation of the war in Iraq by sending about 20,000 more U.S. troops to Iraq. The American people, their representatives, and the military commanders on the ground strongly oppose this course of action. Can Congress do anything about it? Some have claimed that anything other symbolic action is unconstitutional. That's false. A wide range of legal experts agree there are a range of legal options available to Congress to stop, or place conditions on, any escalation in the war in Iraq. For example, John Yoo, a former Bush administration lawyer and one of the staunchest defenders of executive power, noted that "the power of Congress over the budget was absolute, to such an extent that lawmakers could end the war altogether if they chose." On the other side of the political spectrum, Georgetown University Law Professor Marty Lederman agrees. A new report from the Center for American Progress illustrates that Congress has acted repeatedly over the last 35 years to ensure the conduct of military action would "strengthen American national security and reflect the concerns and will of the American people." Congress has passed bills, enacted into law, that capped the size of military deployments, prohibited funding for existing or prospective deployment, and placed limits and conditions on the timing and nature of deployments. CAPPING TROOP LEVELS: Congress has historically exercised authority to cap U.S. troop levels in foreign conflicts. In 1974, the Foreign Assistance Act "established a personnel ceiling of 4000 Americans in Vietnam within 6 months of enactment and 3000 Americans within one year." In 1983, the Lebanon Emergency Assistance Act "required the president to return to seek statutory authorization if he sought to expand the size of the U.S. contingent of the Multinational Force in Lebanon." In 1984, the Defense Authorization Act "capped the end strength level of United States forces assigned to permanent duty in European NATO countries at 324,400." All of this legislation was enacted into law. RESTRICTING FUNDING: Congress has also restricted funding for certain military operations for U.S. troops. In 1970, the Supplemental Foreign Assistance Law, "prohibited the use of any funds for the introduction of U.S. troops to Cambodia or provide military advisors to Cambodian forces." In 1982, the Defense Appropriation Act "prohibited covert military assistance for Nicaragua." In 1994, Congress restricted the use of funds "for United States military participation to continue Operations Restore Hope in or around Rwanda after October 7, 1994."All of these funding restrictions were enacted into law. Read the report for more examples. CONDITIONING FUNDING: Alternatively, Congress has authorized military action subject to various conditions. In 1991, Congress authorized the use of force against Iraq but conditioned it on the President "certifying first that means other than war would not result in Iraqi compliance with UN Security Council resolutions." In 2001, President Bush sought authority to respond to the 9/11 attacks to "deter and pre-empt any future acts of terrorism or aggression against the United States." Instead, Congress limited the authority to "all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned authorized committed or aided" the 9/11 attacks. CONGRESS NOT SITTING ON THE SIDELINES: Today, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) will propose one option, asserting Congressional authority and demanding accountability for the President's policy. Kennedy "will introduce legislation on Tuesday to require the president to gain new Congressional authority before sending more troops to Iraq. The bill is the first proposal in the Senate that would prohibit paying for an increase in American troops over their level on Jan. 1." Kennedy's action is similar to a proposal outlined in an American Progress memo, released in December, which recommended "an amendment on the supplemental funding bill that states that if the administration wants to increase the number of troops in Iraq above 150,000, it must provide a plan for their purpose and require an up or down vote on exceeding that number."

I just reviewing the Congressional Record when I saw your post. Executive nominations received by the Senate November 9, 2006: DEPARTMENT OF STATE JOHN ROBERT BOLTON, OF MARYLAND, TO BE THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE UNITED NATIONS, WITH THE RANK AND STATUS OF AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY, AMERICA IN THE SECURITY COUNCIL OF THE UNITED NATIONS. JOHN ROBERT BOLTON, OF MARYLAND, TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE SESSIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE UNITED NATIONS DURING HIS TENURE OF SERVICE AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE UNITED NATIONS. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...mp;position=all You might want to read this: Bolton, the White House's ambassador to the United Nations, who resigned Monday, made his mark on the world organization from the beginning as a hard-working diplomat who cared less about etiquette than about getting the results he wanted. Bolton strongly defended US President George W Bush's policies, including the war in Iraq. He pushed efforts to gain respect for human rights in war-torn Darfur in Sudan and in Myanmar, which is ruled by a military junta. 'As a US representative, he has pressed ahead with the instructions that he had been given and tried to work as effectively as he could with the other ambassadors,' UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said upon learning of Bolton's resignation. Annan said he would not single out Bolton or other envoys for failures to reform the UN. 'I have always maintained that ambassadors have to work together and understand that they have to make concessions and they need to work with each other for the organization to move ahead,' Annan said. Annan, who is stepping down from the UN leadership on December 31, said he and Bolton will exit the UN headquarters 'together.' Annan's request that ambassadors work together to solve world crises did not always appeal to Bolton, who had a separate agenda - from the White House and the conservative wing of the Republican Party. From the time Bolton arrived at UN headquarters in 2005 as a Congress-recessed appointee, UN diplomats remarked that he had a clear US agenda. He often clashed with other diplomats over the US- led war in Iraq and US efforts to block international conventions like the Kyoto Protocol and the International Criminal Court. Bolton led the campaign to prevent the establishment of a UN Human Rights Council, voting against it when the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly approved it in March. He had first sought a stronger and more accountable Human Rights Council to replace the discredited UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. But he turned against the Human Rights Council when his efforts failed. He had recently criticized the Human Rights Council for its performance below the levels of the previous commission in Geneva. Bolton infuriated the Non-aligned Movement and the so-called Group of 77, both of which hold the majority of votes in the 192-nation assembly, by demanding dozens of amendments to their plans to reform the UN secretariat. Bolton, along with many Western European nations, had demanded more authority for the UN secretary general to hire qualified personnel and draw up policy. The mass of developing nations in the assembly wanted to have the last say in UN programmes and would not relinquish that authority. Annan sided with Bolton in demanding more power to govern the UN, but lost. This year, Bolton cast two vetoes blocking separate resolutions backed by Arab countries and the Palestinian Authority demanding an end to Israeli incursions into Palestinian-held territories. Bolton called the resolutions one-sided. In the UN Security Council, Bolton often clashed with Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya and Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin on the nuclear issues in Iran and North Korea. Bolton pushed sanctions, which were opposed by those two ambassadors, to force Iran and North Korea to comply with international demands to abandon their nuclear programmes. Bolton, who loves to banter with reporters covering the UN, never missed cameras set up at the entrance to the UN Security Council chamber and was once scorned by Wang for his media interactions. 'John, you talk too much,' Wang once told his counterpart when Bolton was entertaining reporters with seemingly endless statements. Diplomats said Wang and Bolton often clashed during closed-door sessions of the 15-nation council, particularly on human rights issues. When Bolton wanted the council to take up the situation in the Myanmar, Wang opposed. Bolton forced the council to hold a public vote to adopt his idea, but Wang voted against the proposal in a procedural vote usually taken behind closed-doors. Wang said Bolton carried the US agenda at the UN and 'succeeded in some way.' Wang was among the first to express sadness to see Bolton leave. 'I regret that he's resigning, he works very hard and has his own style,' Wang said. 'He works hard on issues and I enjoy working with him.' Argentinian UN Ambassador Cesar Mayoral concurred with Wang that Bolton worked hard to change the UN. 'I work very well with him,' Mayoral said. But the diplomat said it would be up to the international community to assess Bolton's performance. UN diplomats acknowledged that the UN Security Council has become more transparent and punctual during Bolton's tenure in contrast to the http://news.monstersandcritics.com/usa/fea...rided_by_others

Who: AfterDowningStreet.org, the Backbone Campaign, Code Pink, Progressive Democrats of America, Democrats.com, World Can't Wait and other organizations What: Panel-led Discussion on Impeachment and Accountability Where: Bus Boys and Poets Restaurant, 14th and V St, NW Washington, DC Why: To discuss the practical, political, legal and geopolitical ramifications of impeachment. When: 1 to 3 PM Sunday, December 10, 2006 Experts to discuss impeachment / accountability in public event. Steve Cobble, Institute for Policy Studies Fellow and Cofounder of AfterDowningStreet will discuss the Politics of Impeachment. Debra Sweet, National Organizer of World Can't Wait will express the Need to Drive out the Bush Regime and Rostam Pourzal, President of the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran will focus on the need to prevent hostile actions against Iran. Tim Carpenter, Executive Director of Progressive Democrats of America and Cofounder of AfterDowningStreet will outline Grassroots' Demands for Impeachment. Event Organizer Mike Hersh of Progressive Democrats said, “The demand for accountability and impeachment grew out of stunning revelations from the Downing Street documents which proved the Bush Administration sought war with Iraq despite their assurances to the contrary, the lack of evidence on weapons of mass destruction, and the successful inspections which made war unnecessary. Bush, Cheney and others took us to war based on lies. Other scandals including torture at Abu Ghraib, abuses at Gitmo, wiretapping innocent Americans and much more only increased these demands. This event will highlight and give voice to the powerful and growing pro-impeachment movement. The new Democratic Majority in Congress should heed these calls.” Appearance and Photo Op by the Bush Chain Gang "We started the Chain Gang project in order to aid the growing impeachment efforts around the country. We believe that impeachment is not a political problem as many like to frame it, but rather a Constitutional obligation." - backbonecampaign.org The Bush Chain Gang depicts Bush, Cheney, Rice, and other officials as living political cartoons which add to any print or video news report. Featured in Reuters, CNN, New York Daily News, Lone Star Iconoclast, and Wisconsin State Journal reports. Event is free and open to the public. Participants will answer questions from the media and public as part of the event. Interviews may be arranged through contacts. More information on nation-wide events: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/december10

With their votes on Nov. 7th, the American people asked for change in Washington, an end to the partisanship and paralysis that had come to mark the outgoing 109th Congress. According to exit polling, 61 percent disapproved of the job Congress was doing. Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has said that Americans desire a "new direction," including a return to the bipartisan civility that is needed to advance a change of course. Pelosi has articulated a 100-hour agenda that provides the right start for the 110th Congress. Among other things, that agenda pledges new ethical reforms for how Congress will operate and calls for passage of legislation that should attract broad support on both sides of the aisle, such as raising the minimum wage, empowering government to lower prescription drug prices, replacing tax breaks for polluting oil companies with clean energy technologies, lowering the cost of college, and promoting stem cell research. The mandate for change has provided progressives an opportunity to show that our governing philosophy addresses real people’s concerns. The righted ship of Congress should leave Americans feeling that progressives have delivered change that clearly opens the doors of opportunity to a growing middle class, reawakens our conscience, and commits us to the common good, reforms government, and restores the image of the U.S. as a nation of both strength and a force for progress. To accomplish these goals, the Center for American Progress Action Fund yesterday released its recommendation for fresh ideas and policies that the 110th Congress should enact in the first 100 days. Read the full agenda here. Some highlights: NATIONAL SECURITY GOALS BEGIN WITH IRAQ: The number one priority of the new Congress is to forge a consensus for achieving a successful conclusion to the war in Iraq. Doing so would increase stability in the broader Middle East, restore the strength of the overstretched U.S. military, and most importantly, free up our resources to bolster our efforts to address the real threat, global terrorist networks. As the Center for American Progress proposed in its plan for Iraq -- Strategic Redeployment -- Congress should urge President Bush to begin a responsible redeployment of troops that reduces the U.S. military footprint in Iraq in phases, starting as soon as possible and resulting in a virtually complete drawdown within 18 months. Beyond advocating phased withdrawal, Congress should urge the creation of a Special Envoy for Iraq, an official who would be responsible for organizing an international peace conference that would include Iraqi and other regional leaders. Moreover, the U.S. should lead the establishment of a Gulf Stability Initiative, a regional security framework to enhance security and cooperation among countries in the region. To enhance cooperation with the administration, Congress should establish a bicameral and bipartisan working group that would meet with top administration officials on a weekly basis to collaborate on getting the policy in Iraq right. SECURITY PRIORITIES BEYOND IRAQ: Beyond Iraq, Congress needs to take action on a host of other national security priorities. With its power over the budget, Congress should work to restore the military readiness of our armed forces. The Army and Marines are showing the wear and tear of nearly five years of constant battle. Two-thirds of the Army's combat brigades in our operating force are not ready for combat. To restore readiness levels, the Army alone estimates that it needs more than $40 billion, while the Marines need an additional $10 to $15 billion to reset the force. With its power to conduct oversight of the administration, Congress should demand a number of critical reports from the administration. First, Congress should enact a requirement that the Intelligence Community provide new or updated National Intelligence Estimates as soon as possible on: (1) Trends in Global Terrorism; (2) Iraq; (3) Afghanistan; (4) Iran’s nuclear weapons development and delivery capability; and (5) North Korea’s nuclear weapons development and delivery capability. Second, Congress cannot countenance the ongoing genocide in Darfur. It can begin by demanding the adminstration produce a set of detailed reports outlining U.S. plans for obtaining United Nations Security Council support for multilateral targeted sanctions and providing U.S. military and diplomatic support of the rapid deployment of a U.N. peacekeeping force. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND FAIRNESS AT HOME: The 100 days agenda seeks to address existing economic disparities for low- and middle-income families struggling to make ends meet and expand economic growth and opportunity through greater energy security, education reform, and investments in health prevention. Currently, the amount of the Child Tax Credit that families can receive is limited if they have low incomes. To begin to address economic disparities, Congress should expand the Child Tax Credit, and it should also triple the small Earned Income Tax Credit for childless workers as an important step to increase employment among disadvantaged young adults. We can restore fairness in the workplace by empowering workers with the right to organize. A good first step would be to allow employers to recognize a union if the majority of employees sign union recognition cards in support of union representation. To work towards greater energy security, Congress should establish a benchmark of producing 25 percent of the nation’s fuel from renewable resources by 2025. It can begin to implement that goal by tying an extension of the CAFE credit for Flexible Fuel Vehicles to reductions in the mileage penalty and increases in the percentage of auto fleets that run on both ethanol and gasoline. To rebuild our public school system, Congress should enact proposals contained in the TEACH Act that use bonuses and other rewards to help ensure that high quality teachers are teaching in hard-to-serve schools. And lastly, our agenda identifies approximately $100 billion that can be saved by cracking down on offshore tax shelters and reducing highway earmarks. AFTER 100 DAYS: Some progressive policy prescriptions simply cannot be accomplished by the new Congress in 100 days. Accordingly, between now and the August recess we recommend that the congressional leadership take the following eight steps to help restore the common good as the primary goal of progressive government policy. First, Congress should enact legislation that protects consumers from abusive credit card lending practices. Second, Congress should protect Social Security’s guaranteed benefit and promote ownership with a new Universal 401(k) that offers all Americans a private retirement account on top of Social Security. Third, Congress should establish an independent agency -- the Wellness Trust -- to set priorities and pay for disease prevention and health promotion. Fourth, Congress should enact comprehensive immigration reform that would combine effective enforcement with a process of earned legalization that regulates future flows of immigrants into our country. Fifth, Congress should ensure that electronic surveillance of persons in the United States is conducted in accordance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Sixth, Congress should adopt a temperature target to help guide climate change policies. Seventh, require 25 percent of electricity production from renewable sources by 2025. And eighth, improve high school graduation rates by holding schools and districts accountable and providing sufficient flexibility to meet these targets.

There have already been widespread reports of voter suppression by Republican operatives, ranging from apparently legal harassment of Democratic voters to potentially illegal efforts to keep voters away from the voting booth. This isn't new for Republicans. It's a cynical art that the Republican machine has refined for years, and each election brings new variations on old tactics that target minorities and minority-heavy areas. Here's what you need to know: 1) If you're a registered voter, do not leave your polling location without voting. Every registered voter is entitled to cast a provisional ballot. 2) If you're in line before the poll's closing time, you are entitled to vote. 3) You're entitled to view a sample ballot at the polling place before voting. 4) If you experience any problems voting or observe any irregularities, immediately call 1-888-DEM-VOTE to report the incident. In addition to providing your polling place information, by calling 1-888-DEM-VOTE you can record a complaint or speak with an election protection monitor. The line is available in English and Spanish. You can also report any voting irregularities or problems online: http://www.democrats.org/voterprotection/report

Luke you might want to read this. Former Defense Policy Board chairman and prominent neoconservative Richard Perle, one of the principle advocates of invading Iraq, blasts the Bush administration’s policy in Iraq in a new interview with Vanity Fair. Vanity Fair published excerpts of Perle's remarks in a press release on Friday. "[bush] did not make decisions, in part because the machinery of government that he nominally ran was actually running him," said Perle. "Huge mistakes were made," he said, though Perle accepted "no responsibility" for designing the campaign to invade Iraq and the mishandling of the aftermath. Neoconservatives now falsely claim they had "almost no voice in what happened." But now, Perle is calling foul, saying he only agreed to tell the truth if it was published after the election. "Vanity Fair has rushed to publish a few sound bites from a lengthy discussion with David Rose…I had been promised that my remarks would not be published before the election." Another prominent conservative quoted in the article, Eliot Cohen, has a different view. “[T]hinking the government’s conduct of the Iraq war an entirely appropriate subject of political debate, I do not think anyone should have kept mum in an interview of this kind until an election had passed.” http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/feature...2?currentPage=2

Did you know that in August 2005, Bush signed into law an energy bill that lavished $14.5 billion in tax breaks on energy firms, nearly 60 percent of which went to "oil, natural gas, coal, electric utilities and nuclear power." The bill was largely written by a group of representatives from utility companies and the oil, gas, coal and nuclear energy industries convened by Vice President Cheney in 2001. Their recommendations were often incorporated "word for word." http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/taskforce/tfinx.asp

That is the problem Human, these crooked politicians get what they want. This Congress will be remembered more for its scandals than for any legislative accomplishments. On Friday, Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) resigned from Congress after pleading guilty last month in the Jack Abramoff investigation, which has become the symbol of the 109th Congress's gluttony. The Washington Post called it the "biggest corruption scandal to infect Congress in a generation." In addition to Ney, five other congressional staffers and members of the Bush administration have pleaded guilty to giving legislative favors in exchange for perks from Abramoff, including golf junkets, foreign trips, sporting event tickets, and expensive meals. At least half a dozen other House and Senate members -- such as Rep. Richard Pombo (R-CA) and Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) -- have not yet been convicted in the Abramoff investigation, but their past ties to the lobbyist have been haunting their current re-election campaigns. In March, former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) was sentenced to more than eight years in federal prison -- the longest sentence ever given to a member of Congress -- for accepting $2.4 million in bribes in exchange for lucrative defense contracts. Two of the federal contractors charged in that scandal admitted to arranging for a prostitute for the congressman, in addition to throwing poker parties with **nerds** that high-ranking CIA officials and lawmakers possibly attended. FBI documents also allege Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) accepted bribes to help iGate, a small technology company, "win contracts with federal agencies and with businesses and governments in West Africa." Overall, "Mr. Jefferson and his family received more than $400,000 from iGate." The conservative leadership of the 109th Congress wanted absolute power and set up a complicated pay-to-play system to obtain and retain it. Most emblematic of this system was the K Street Strategy -- set up by DeLay in 1995 -- which created the culture of corruption in which players like Abramoff and Cunningham flourished. DeLay explicitly stated he would operate by "the old adage of punish your enemies and reward your friends." (To gain influence over legislation, trade associations and corporate lobbyists were ordered to do three things: 1) refuse to hire Democrats, 2) hire only deserving Republicans as identified by the congressional leadership, and 3) contribute heavily to Republican coffers.) Despite being admonished by the House Ethics Committee numerous times for his conduct, DeLay's pay-to-play machine continued to plow full-speed ahead. In January, the Wall Street Journal wrote about the atrophy of Congress's principles, noting that "House Republicans have become more passionate about retaining power than in using that power to change or limit the federal government. ... Re-election unites them, however, so the leadership has gradually settled for raising money on K Street and satisfying Beltway interest groups to sustain their incumbency. This strategy has maintained a narrow majority, but at the cost of doing anything substantial. ... Ideas are an afterthought, when they aren't an inconvenience."

ROFLMAO. You are funny. We are gonna kick some Cowboy butt this Sunday!!!!!!!!!!

Two years ago, Denmark declared war on killer fat, making it illegal for any food to have more than 2 percent transfats. Offenders now face hefty fines -- or even prison terms. But, I believe kids need excercise. When I was a kid we used to jump rope or play basketball. Kids today just sit around and play with their xbox.

You can fool fools, but not me Human. What do you have to say about before adjourning last week, the House and Senate passed a $436.6 billion military spending bill. Not surprisingly, it was jammed with earmarks -- and no written indication of who sponsored the requests. Steve Ellis, vice president of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense, says the spending package "doesn't have a single lawmaker owning up to an earmark." Fact is, Washington is full of slimy bastards. Yessa, that seems like plain old bull crap to me. But, then again you support letting Congress fool us poor taxpaying Americans don't you. I don't underestimate the city that I was born in. That is why I want all the money loving Republican gangstas thrown in jail for ruining our country. http://www.taxpayer.net/TCS/PressReleases/...-29dodfinal.htm

The Bush administration is delaying the release of an annual hunger report until after the elections. The Agriculture Department report, which has generally been released in October, has shown steady increases in the number of people struggling with hunger. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) said, “It seems like a pattern is emerging where the administration simply tries to bury bad information the closer they get to the election.”