An IED exploded in the main road in the Hawija district, 25 miles southwest of Kirkuk city over the weekend, security sources said.
Read The Full Article:
My son, is an operator with an SF team and we are in reg comm. they are ready. we are ready. and if you start reading between the lines, you will see it. L presidente obama bin osama, is breathing borrowed air. as are all of congress. it has gone to far. they will all hang. just be ready.
Perhaps we should have mailed teabags to the pirates. That'd show them!
Democrat Scott Murphy lost 10 votes in adjustments made to vote totals in the New York special election Monday morning and now leads Republican Jim Tedisco by 25 votes.
Murphy gained three votes from some additional re-canvassing of Election Day totals but lost another 13 from the slow trickle of absentee ballots. The addition of about 200 absentee ballots brings the total counted to nearly 1,750 out of more than 6,700.
But really, as much as the Right tried to use this for political gain the last week, it wasn't that big of a deal.
That isn’t to take anything away from what the guys on the scene did, as that appears to have been one helluva shot they took. They also deserve real credit for their prior restraint, and waiting until the right moment to make things happen. They really acted like, well, professionals. But heaping all sorts of praise on Team Obama seems to me to be just as silly as flaming them for this. They acted prudently and cautiously, as anyone who has watched the President for any period of time would have expected him to behave.
I shouldn't have to point out the silliness of arguing that pirates thrive on feminist theory and unrelated apologies from President Obama.
Of course, this would've been at most a minor news blip if the Right hadn't worked so hard to politicize it, so whatever kudos Obama is getting, even if unjustified, is all the fault of those wingnut blowhards.
Ladies and gentlemen, I think every WN needs to not only attend the April 15th Tea Party nearest you (I’m going to the Alamo in San Antonio) but then stay involved and help provide leadership to this movement.
I believe that this is the white revolution we’ve been waiting for.
It doesn’t look what we expected but this is it.
I’ve seen probably 50 videos on TV showing previous marches and what strikes me is that the participants are all WHITE. It stands to reason . . . we’re the ones being taxed to support Affirmative Action, Welfare and other worthless social programs. It’s our tax dollars going to ACORN and supporting the 12 million illegals swarming into our neighborhoods.
This Wednesday, April 15th, the city of Lawrence, Kansas, has the honor of hosting Kim Gandy, the[...]
Read The Full Article:
With only seventy-two hours or so before America gets teabagged by conservatives the teabagggers are getting all hard-nippled with excitement as their big day approaches. After Wednesday, NOTHING IN AMERICA WILL EVER BE THE SAME AGAIN...[...]
Read The Full Article:
Over five months after the election, a three-judge panel has declared Democrat Al Franken the winner of the Minnesota U.S. Senate race.Markos quotes the Minnesota Post saying that regardless of what Coleman chooses to do, they think Franken will be seated in May or June.
The judges issued their final ruling late Monday, stating "Franken received the highest number of lawfully cast ballots in the Nov. 4, 2008 general election."
They also have determined that Franken is entitled to receive the certificate of election.
Gallup has an interesting finding on confidence in Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. It seems that perceptions of this ostensibly nonpartisan official depend heavily on which President he happens to be working for.
Percent Expressing Great Deal/Fair Amount of Confidence in Ben Bernanke:
Democrats Independents RepublicansNote that the partisan split in perceptions of Bernanke have almost exactly reversed themselves. Last year, 61 percent of Republicans but 40 percent of Democrats had confidence in his performance; this year, those numbers are 64 percent and 36 percent, respectively.
2008 40 43 61
2009 64 44 36
In the past week, Fox News and Fox Business host Neil Cavuto has been defending his network’s decision to aggressively promote the right-wing, lobbyist-funded tea party protests. Cavuto’s main line of defense has been that the network is “fair and balanced” in the protests it covers:
– Apparently, these populist protests don’t count much for them. Millions concerned they’re being taxed and feed to death counts even less for them. But a Million March March that turns out to be well shy of a million men — even half a million men — does count for them. We covered the follow-up marches to that Million Man March, because no matter the number, it was a big deal. [Fox News, 4/9/09]
– We do not pick and choose these rallies and protests. We were there for the Million Man March, even though, as I pointed out, it turned out to be well shy of a million men. [Fox Business, 4/11/09]
– Because like in the Million Man March, it didn’t turn out to be a million men, but it got covered. [Fox Business, 4/11/09]
– You seem to pick and choose what events and protests were worthy. Million Man March, worthy, even though it wasn’t a million men, it was half a million. We covered that because we thought it had a worthy message too. [Fox News, 4/8/09]
– But a Million March March that turns out to be well shy of a million men — even half a million men — does count for them. We covered the follow-up marches to that Million Man March, because no matter the number, it was a big deal. [Fox Business, 4/9/09]
Watch a compilation:
The problem, as News Hounds points out, is that the Million Man March took place on Oct. 16, 1995. According to the News Corp. website, however, Fox News did not begin operations until Oct. 7, 1996 — almost a full year after the March. Cavuto joined the network a few months before it launched — in July 1996. Before joining Fox, he was at CNBC.
The cry of the teabaggers is "no taxation without representation." Hmm, where does that happen the most?
To provide for the treatment of the District of Columbia as a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009'.
SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AS CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.
(a) In General- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the District of Columbia shall be considered a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives.
(b) Conforming Amendments Relating to Apportionment of Members of House of Representatives-
(1) INCLUSION OF SINGLE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MEMBER IN REAPPORTIONMENT OF MEMBERS AMONG STATES- Section 22 of the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the fifteenth and subsequent decennial censuses and to provide for apportionment of Representatives in Congress', approved June 28, 1929 (2 U.S.C. 2a), is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
`(d) This section shall apply with respect to the District of Columbia in the same manner as this section applies to a State, except that the District of Columbia may not receive more than one Member under any reapportionment of Members.'.
(2) CLARIFICATION OF DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS ON BASIS OF 23RD AMENDMENT- Section 3 of title 3, United States Code, is amended by striking `come into office;' and inserting the following: `come into office (subject to the twenty-third article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States in the case of the District of Columbia);'.
SEC. 3. INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP OF HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
(a) Permanent Increase in Number of Members- Effective with respect to the One Hundred Eleventh Congress and each succeeding Congress, the House of Representatives shall be composed of 437 Members, including any Members representing the District of Columbia pursuant to section 2(a).
(b) Reapportionment of Members Resulting From Increase-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 22(a) of the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the fifteenth and subsequent decennial censuses and to provide for apportionment of Representatives in Congress', approved June 28, 1929 (2 U.S.C. 2a(a)), is amended by striking `the then existing number of Representatives' and inserting `the number of Representatives established with respect to the One Hundred Eleventh Congress'.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall apply with respect to the regular decennial census conducted for 2010 and each subsequent regular decennial census.
(c) Special Rules for Period Prior to 2012 Reapportionment-
(1) TRANSMITTAL OF REVISED STATEMENT OF APPORTIONMENT BY PRESIDENT- Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall transmit to Congress a revised version of the most recent statement of apportionment submitted under section 22(a) of the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the fifteenth and subsequent decennial censuses and to provide for apportionment of Representatives in Congress', approved June 28, 1929 (2 U.S.C. 2a(a)), to take into account this Act and the amendments made by this Act.
(2) REPORT BY CLERK- Not later than 15 calendar days after receiving the revised version of the statement of apportionment under paragraph (1), the Clerk of the House of Representatives, in accordance with section 22(b) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 2a(b)), shall send to the executive of each State a certificate of the number of Representatives to which such State is entitled under section 22 of such Act, and shall submit a report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives identifying the State (other than the District of Columbia) which is entitled to one additional Representative pursuant to this section.
(3) REQUIREMENTS FOR ELECTION OF ADDITIONAL MEMBER- During the One Hundred Eleventh Congress and the One Hundred Twelfth Congress--
(A) notwithstanding the final undesignated paragraph of the Act entitled `An Act for the relief of Doctor Ricardo Vallejo Samala and to provide for congressional redistricting', approved December 14, 1967 (2 U.S.C. 2c), the additional Representative to which the State identified by the Clerk of the House of Representatives in the report submitted under paragraph (2) is entitled shall be elected from the State at large; and
(B) the other Representatives to which such State is entitled shall be elected on the basis of the Congressional districts in effect in the State for the One Hundred Tenth Congress.
SEC. 4. NONSEVERABILITY OF PROVISIONS.
If any provision of this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, is declared or held invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Act and any amendment made by this Act shall be treated and deemed invalid and shall have no force or effect of law.
Over at the Houston Tea Party site one commenter writes:
Yes, this must be a protest about taxes, but it is really a protest about TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. This includes the real issue of an unresponsive congress.....they're deaf to their employers and have built artificial fortresses around themselves aided by special interest groups,the media,ACORN and Excessively fat campaign chests. Gary Sitzman, Sealy TZ 77474
I wonder if Gary supports representation of D.C.'s citizens.
Remember the Alamo? Well, they're having a tea party there, too:
Join us as we raise the banner of "NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION" and remember those brave sons of liberty who rose up and told old King George what he could do with his tea tax and once again rais the rallying cry to "REMEMBER THE ALAMO" this April 15th.
So tell me, Texas, will you demand that your Representatives stand up for D.C.?
Check out The FOX Nation, where they say:
No Taxation Without Representation!
We're fed up and we're not gonna take it anymore. Such is the rallying cry building across the country as taxpayers take a stand against what they see as reckless spending in Washington -- all part of a peculiar and rather sudden movement called "tea parties."
I hope "The FOX Nation" bombards their favorite network with letters and emails of support for our 436th Congress-person.
Virginia Beach is having its own tea party.
We are organizing a tax protest "tea party" to take place on April 15, 2009 at Central Plaza, Towne Center (across from Senator Webb's Office) Virginia Beach, VA. This is a non-partisan event designed to be creative and effective. Our representatives are not listening to us on the bailout, TARP, the stimulus A.K.A. "porkulus" bill, and now the 3+ trillion dollar budget. We in effect have "taxation without representation".
Will the good citizens of Virginia Beach rally around the cause of over-taxed and unrepresented Washington D.C.?
Americans for the Constitution are very much against "taxation without representation":
You've all heard this phrase before - perhaps as if it's something from way back in the 1700's, right? Well the reality is, of course, that Taxation without Representation is what is happening RIGHT NOW. You're paying taxes right? What are we getting for your tax dollars currently? Your tax dollars and mine are being used on a spending spree by our Democratic leaders. A spending and printing spree like never before - not even close.
If we really "Surround Them," maybe we can use the power of intimidation to help out the people in D.C. That is part of your agenda, isn't it?
To Show these politicians we will no longer stand for Taxation without REPRESENTATION!
Will there be a tea party in Ft. Myers? If so, this guy will be there:
It would be nice to have a tea party in the Fort Myers area. Anyone?
Stand up against taxation without representation!
Say no to socialism!
Hey Andy, what are your thoughts on whether "taxation without representation" is okay for black people?
Of course, any movement like this is likely to bring out the crazies:
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:34 am
TAXATION BY AN INELIGIBLE PRESIDENT IS TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.
NO BIRTH CERTIFICATE - WHO IS HE TO TAKE LAYERS AND LAYERS OF NEW TAXES FROM HARD WORKING AMERICANS?
Where do you think Ted is on the D.C. issue?
I don't think Jose really understands "democracy," since he seems to think only those who voted for the President are represented by him. Hmm, I wonder who represents D.C.?
I guess the Democrats that voted for Obama do not sse the Trillion Dollar funding dished out as bail out and oversight funding as taxation without representation so they need not waste time at a Tea Party. For those of us who did not vote for this Democrat platform, and our elected representatives did no vote the Trillion Dollar fundings, it is like taxation without representation. Any hint of representation was wiped out by Pelosi when she abolished open debate. You can be sure we will be at the Tea Party with all our friends.
It gets really fun when you start looking at the better-known right wing websites. The Eagle Forum is certainly against giving D.C. residents any representation:
Urge your Senators to Vote NO on S. 1257
Earlier this year, Democrats attempted to pad their majority by giving certain congressional voting rights to delegates from 5 non-state territories-the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. As we predicted, that was only the beginning. This past March, the House Democrats took a bold and unconstitutional move by passing the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act (H.R. 1905), which passed by a vote of 241 to 177. This bill would grant full voting rights to the D.C. delegate. Now, with less than 15 legislative days left in this session of Congress, Harry Reid has decided to bring this very bill to the floor of the Senate!
But if you go to the front page today, you will find a video entitled "Find a Tea Party." Hmmmm, I wonder why that is. Maybe they really mean "No taxation of white people without representation."
Over at Hot Air they love tea parties, but they hate voting rights for D.C.:
Senate passes unconstitutional bill granting House voting rights to D.C.
Pajamas Media hates taxation without representation and loves tea parties. Well, except when the people voting might be doing it in D.C.:
Last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid brought legislation to the floor to address a recent calamity that befell the United States. No, I am not referring to the financial panic, the collapse of the housing bubble, Hurricane Katrina, or even the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The disaster that Reid sought to rectify was the election of a Republican majority to the House of Representatives in 1994 and the five subsequent elections.
The District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 passed the Senate last Thursday by a vote of 61-37. The bill will add two seats to the House of Representatives. One will represent the District of Columbia and the other, at least initially, will represent a district in Utah. Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, a Republican, co-sponsored the bill.
How about The Free Republic? Surely, those stalwarts of liberty support representation for anybody who votes, don't they? They find tea parties "inspirational." They're not so "inspired" by representation for everybody:
Some proposals in Congress have a recurring lifespan, patently political and clearly unconstitutional though the proposals may be. Doubtless foremost in this unhealthy category is legislation to create for Washington, District of Columbia, or "Confusion" as some might say, a voting representative in Congress, just as though it were a state of the Union and the Constitution were to be ignored.
Why address the subject? It's because the proponents of this unconstitutional gambit, as predicted, now having a heavy majority in both houses of the new Congress and a supportive administration, again are beating the drums of triumph. Specifically the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 is pending in the House of Representatives, doubtless to be passed, and a companion bill in the U.S. Senate, passed on Feb. 26 on a vote of 61 to 37.
I could do this all day, folks, but my point is a fairly simple one. These hypocrites are most easily exposed with one very simple question, one I hope you will ask every time the issue arises- "What are your feelings on a voting Representative for Washington D.C.?" Try it. The stuttering and stammering will provide hours of entertainment. Heck, if somebody is holding a "Tea Party" meet-up or planning session in your neighborhood, show up. Raise the issue. Watch the whole room implode in the sort of logic conundrum that makes robots explode in bad science fiction. Call talk radio and ask what they think. Have some fun with it.
Read The Full Article:
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White
Everyone seems ready to proclaim the death of the GOP. But conservative ideologues have managed to get a bunch of people all worked up about this tea party phenomenon, while pushing policies that would be detrimental to the overwhelming majority of the people going to these "parties."
The main item tea party organizers are rallying behind (because they don't want to associate themselves with the racist, gun-toting, "Obama was born in Kenya" crowd that is promoting these protests) is taxation.Bookmark/Search this post with: buzzflash | delicious | digg | yahoo | technorati Technorati Tags: Analysis tea party. tax day gun dontgo movement gop eric odom steele republican conservative protest video obama cut
I noticed this last week, because my internet access was unusually slow. I wondered then what was going on and finally read about the Bay Area cuts. This additional perspective isn't all that reassuring:
There may be more security issues than ever with a so-called smart grid controlling power distribution in the country.
The real likelihood that hackers can break into such a grid is actually not a possibility, but an inevitability. What is always overlooked when these fancy initiatives are unveiled is the nature of the Internet.
What we need is a distribution system that relies on computer technology for management, but which is completely off the Net itself. Nobody wants to do that.
It is crazy to put all of our eggs in one Internet basket, as the telecommunications scene worldwide is subject to too much hacking. Even a non-Internet network cannot be secured.
This problem goes further than hackers online -- it goes to our overdependence on interconnectivity through common connections.
This week in the San Francisco Bay Area, the fiber-optic cable network was purposely sliced at four distinct locations. Where a hacker cannot succeed, bolt cutters will do.
[...] Once the cables were cut, Internet service was flaky for the region and completely out for 50,000 customers. On top of that, the landlines would not work and the cell-phone towers in the area went dead.
Does anyone find this sort of interdependency a little disconcerting? It is as if someone was testing the grid for either redundancy or failure points.
Much of the problem stems from the issues with technologies such as fiber optics. They require a level of public trust to work, because the cables must be clearly marked to prevent public works and contractors from accidentally cutting them.
In most parts of the country, there are signs up and down highways, across bodies of water and even in cities marking the location of a fiber-optic line. There are even maps of these things and where they are located.
How much work would it take to find some choke points that you could cut for the purposes of disrupting data communications in an area? How would this affect the so-called smart grid?
The peculiar nature of the four cuts around the Bay Area indicated to me that someone was mapping how they would affect the region, keeping in mind that by cutting the cable in key areas you might be able to take down half the country. If more cuts are made in the future, then someone is trying to reverse-engineer the network to find the most vulnerable points of disruption.