Back to the top

Bill Clinton

Cheney’€™s ‘Tortured Logic’ and America’s Apathy

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/syndicated_player/index.jhtml

What is it going to take for Congress, the media and the American people to wise up and impeach Dick Cheney?

Obviously it isn’t enough that he lied us into an illegal, unjust and immoral war. It doesn’t matter that he ignored a Congressional subpoena and still refuses to release details of his energy task force that may have outlined the administration’s imperial oil-grabbing tactics pre-911. It makes no difference that the vice president ordered the outing of the undercover CIA operative in charge of finding Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction” because her husband publicly refuted the administration’s falsehoods about said wmds.

The fact that he lead the military in its use of interrogation tactics that amount to torture (until Congress allowed the administration to change the definition of torture), is apparently irrelevant. No one seems to care that Cheney was in charge of war games on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001 that may have slowed military and air traffic control response to plane hijackings. And shooting that guy in the face? Well, it could have happened to any experienced hunter shooting caged quails.

Now it is revealed the vice president hasn’t been complying with an executive order that requires executive branch employees to report on the nature of the classified documents they create. The VP justifies his noncompliance by claiming that his role as President of the Senate separates him from the executive branch. Who cares what the Constitution says, right?
Continue reading

Cheney’€™s ‘Tortured Logic’ and America’s Apathy

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

What is it going to take for Congress, the media and the American people to wise up and impeach Dick Cheney?

Obviously it isn’t enough that he lied us into an illegal, unjust and immoral war. It doesn’t matter that he ignored a Congressional subpoena and still refuses to release details of his energy task force that may have outlined the administration’s imperial oil-grabbing tactics pre-911. It makes no difference that the vice president ordered the outing of the undercover CIA operative in charge of finding Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction” because her husband publicly refuted the administration’s falsehoods about said wmds.

The fact that he lead the military in its use of interrogation tactics that amount to torture (until Congress allowed the administration to change the definition of torture), is apparently irrelevant. No one seems to care that Cheney was in charge of war games on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001 that may have slowed military and air traffic control response to plane hijackings. And shooting that guy in the face? Well, it could have happened to any experienced hunter shooting caged quails.

Now it is revealed the vice president hasn’t been complying with an executive order that requires executive branch employees to report on the nature of the classified documents they create. The VP justifies his noncompliance by claiming that his role as President of the Senate separates him from the executive branch. Who cares what the Constitution says, right?
Continue reading

Bill Clinton, Barry Sanders and the Future of the NAACP

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

Billed as the biggest sit down dinner in the world, the 52nd Annual NAACP Fight for Freedom Fund Dinner attracted 10,000 to Detroit’€™s Cobo Hall on April 29. Dinner itself was unremarkable. (Reports confirm that each entree – cajun beef, some unidentified fish or a mushroom pasta – was equally mediocre.)

What was most important about this dinner though was the guest list. The governor, both of Michigan’€™s US senators, several congress members, the mayor and other public officials, business and union leaders, entrepreneurs and preachers all joined grassroots activists to honor and support the nation’€™s oldest and largest civil rights organization.

During the three and a half hour event, Lifetime Achievement awards were given to Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, attorney and politician Joel Ferguson and former NAACP head Ernest Lofton. But the main attraction was the keynote address from the man described by several of the night’€™s speakers as “€œour president”€, William Jefferson Clinton. Continue reading

Bill or Hillary: Who is Running this Race?

Originally posted by Nadir at Reformed Leftist & Friends

Slick Willie is defending his wife’s pro-war vote by saying that she voted for “coercive inspections”, not that she wanted war.

What could that phrase possibly mean except, we’re going to hold you at gunpoint while we look for (nonexistant) weapons? Hogwash!

No matter what she thought she was voting for, she and other congressional Dems who voted “yes” to the Iraqi invasion are as culpable as the madmen who invaded because they enabled the war mongering maniacs.

And don’t be fooled. The Dems are beholden to the same corporate entities that have been advocating this war from the jump.

Who is running for president anyway? I don’t have a problem with a husband defending his wife, but if she is strong enough to be president, Hillary shouldn’t need her prospective First Husband to explain her position.

Should she?

Check out the article from The Hill linked HERE and above.

The Democrats are Punks Revisited

Charles Pierce’s post on The American Prospect and Greg Saunders blog “Don’t Vote Democrat” on Huffington Post are right on the money.

The Democratic Party allowed some so-called “maverick” Republicans to co-opt the torture issue, and we wind up with Bush getting exactly what he wants: the ability to torture and amnesty for his own human rights offenses.

As Pierce says:

… the Democratic Party was nowhere in this debate. It contributed nothing. On the question of whether or not the United States will reconfigure itself as a nation which tortures its purported enemies and then grants itself absolution through adjectives – “Aggressive interrogation techniques” – the Democratic Party had…no opinion. On the issue of allowing a demonstrably incompetent president as many of the de facto powers of a despot that you could wedge into a bill without having the Constitution spontaneously combust in the Archives, well, the Democratic Party was more pissed off at Hugo Chavez.

Saunders has the right idea about what our response should be:

Since the Democrats don’t seem to be interested in convincing the public to vote for them, then here’s a better idea : This November vote against every incumbent on the ballot. Whether they’re part of the Republican, Democrat, or Connecticut for Lieberman parties, throw out the whole damn lot of them. If the choice is between a party that openly supports the destruction of habeas corpus or a party that’s too timid to take a stand in favor of basic human decency, then I’d rather just roll the dice and try to start over with a clean slate. Continue reading

The Democrats are Punks Revisited

Charles Pierce’s post on The American Prospect and Greg Saunders blog “Don’t Vote Democrat” on Huffington Post are right on the money.

The Democratic Party allowed some so-called “maverick” Republicans to co-opt the torture issue, and we wind up with Bush getting exactly what he wants: the ability to torture and amnesty for his own human rights offenses.

As Pierce says:

… the Democratic Party was nowhere in this debate. It contributed nothing. On the question of whether or not the United States will reconfigure itself as a nation which tortures its purported enemies and then grants itself absolution through adjectives — “Aggressive interrogation techniques” — the Democratic Party had…no opinion. On the issue of allowing a demonstrably incompetent president as many of the de facto powers of a despot that you could wedge into a bill without having the Constitution spontaneously combust in the Archives, well, the Democratic Party was more pissed off at Hugo Chavez.

Saunders has the right idea about what our response should be:

Since the Democrats don’t seem to be interested in convincing the public to vote for them, then here’s a better idea : This November vote against every incumbent on the ballot. Whether they’re part of the Republican, Democrat, or Connecticut for Lieberman parties, throw out the whole damn lot of them. If the choice is between a party that openly supports the destruction of habeas corpus or a party that’s too timid to take a stand in favor of basic human decency, then I’d rather just roll the dice and try to start over with a clean slate. Continue reading

© Nadir Omowale