-
-
Karl Rove must testify or risk contempt
Former White House political guru Karl Rove has no problem spouting off his opinions to Fox News or the Wall Street Journal, but he's being quite cagey in his attempt to avoid sworn testimony on his role in the US Attorney firing scandal.
Two prominent House Democrats wrote to Rove's lawyer Thursday warning that the man who was known as "Bush's Brain" must comply with a subpoena demanding his testimony or he risks criminal contempt of Congress charges. Rove has been subpoenaed to appear at a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing next week; attorney Robert Luskin has been trying to free him from that obligation, instead offering that Rove would speak to committee members behind closed doors, off the record and not under oath.
"We want to make clear that the Subcommittee will convene as scheduled and expects Mr. Rove to appear, and that a refusal to appear in violation of the subpoena could subject Mr. Rove to contempt proceedings, including statutory contempt under federal law and proceedings under the inherent contempt authority of the House of Representatives," wrote Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-CA) and Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-CA), chair of an administrative law subcommittee.
The lawmakers have been investigating the dismissal of at least nine federal prosecutors in what they say was a politically motivated purge likely orchestrated by Rove. Also of interest to the committee, is the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegleman, a Democrat, on what observers say were trumped up charges; Rove's fingerprints also are on that case.
In an earlier letter, Luskin claimed Rove would be unable to testify because of executive privilege being invoked by President Bush.
Conyers and Sanchez remind Luskin that the prominent DC attorney had said publicly that Rove would respond to a subpoena, and they note that several other Bush administration officials have testified to Congress, such as onetime press secretary Scott McClellan, who responded to an invitation, and Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff David Addington, who reluctantly appeared in response to a subpoena. Former White House political guru Karl Rove has no problem spouting off his opinions to Fox News or the Wall Street Journal, but he's ... more -
Obama NOt what you think?
This is a candidate who says he’s going to usher in change; that he is a different kind of politician who has the skills to get things done. He reminds us again and again that he had the foresight to oppose the war in Iraq. And he seems to have a genuine interest in lifting up the poor.
But his record suggests that he is incapable of ushering in any kind of change I’d like to see. It is one of accommodation and concession to the very political powers that we need to rein in and oppose if we are to make truly lasting advances. This is a candidate who says he’s going to usher in change; that he is a different kind of politician who has the skills to get things... more -
Congress passes Iraq war spending bill
WASHINGTON - The Senate passed a $162 billion war spending plan Thursday, sending to President Bush legislation that will pay for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan until the next president takes office.
The package, approved 92-6, includes a doubling of GI Bill college benefits for troops and veterans. It also provides a 13-week extension of unemployment benefits and $2.7 billion in emergency flood relief for the Midwest.
The Senate, however, narrowly failed to approve a House-passed bill to cancel a scheduled cut in payments to doctors who treat Medicare patients. WASHINGTON - The Senate passed a $162 billion war spending plan Thursday, sending to President Bush legislation that will pay for oper... more -
McCain backs gun decision, Obama straddles issue
WASHINGTON - John McCain welcomed a Supreme Court decision invalidating a District of Columbia handgun ban. Barack Obama sought to straddle the subject by saying he favors an individual's right to bear firearms as well as a government's right to regulate them.
The hotly contentious issue surfaced in the presidential campaign Thursday after the Supreme Court ruled that Americans have a constitutional right to own guns and struck down the city's thirty-two-year-old ban. WASHINGTON - John McCain welcomed a Supreme Court decision invalidating a District of Columbia handgun ban. Barack Obama sought to st... more -
Obama's Speech and Dobson's Broadcast
This is a link to both the entire video speech by Obama and Dobson's radio broadcast. The only way to really comment is to listen to both in their entirety. These are long but I think full attention should be paid in order to fairly assess and comment. This is off of Dobson's website and I'm not asking you to necessarily read his comments on his site, its just the only place that I could find both the full speech and broadcast on one page. This is a link to both the entire video speech by Obama and Dobson's radio broadcast. The only way to really comment is to listen to... more
-
You Can't Fuel All of the People All of the Time
Liberals dismiss studies that show a link between abortion and breast cancer, claiming they are biased because the people promoting the studies are "anti-choice."
For the same reason, no one should believe the Democrats' "energy" policies.
Democrats couldn't care less about high gas prices. The consistent policy of the Democratic Party, going back at least to Jimmy Carter, has been to jack up gas prices so we can all start pedaling around on tricycles.
Environmentalists are constantly clamoring for higher gas taxes as the cure-all to their insane global warming theory. Clinton proposed a 26-cent tax on gas. John Kerry said it should be 50 cents. Gore endorsed the Malthusian proposal of Paul and Anne Ehrlich in "The Population Explosion" that gas taxes be raised gradually to match prices in Europe and Japan.
The result is consumers now pay about 46 cents per gallon in gasoline taxes. That's not including taxes paid directly to the government by the oil companies and passed onto consumers. As the inestimable economist John Lott has pointed out, in the past 25 years oil companies have paid more than three times in taxes what they have made in profits.
B. Hussein Obama's response to soaring gas prices is to have the oil companies collect even more money from us at the pump, proposing a "windfall profits tax" on oil companies. "Corporate taxes" sound like taxes on rich people, but all they do is force corporations to collect taxes on behalf of the government.
Democrats have worked hard to ensure that Americans pay as much for gas as Europeans do. After a quarter-century of gas tax hikes, a ban on drilling for oil and a complete destruction of the nuclear power industry in America, I guess liberals can declare: Mission accomplished!
Liberals dismiss studies that show a link between abortion and breast cancer, claiming they are biased because the people promoting th... more -
Terrorist Attack Lesson: Terror Attack + Election = Republicans
In light of Charlie Black’s ridiculous and revealing comments to Fortune magazine Monday, Jon Stewart shows how Republicans are calculating their winning November strategy. In light of Charlie Black’s ridiculous and revealing comments to Fortune magazine Monday, Jon Stewart shows how Republicans are calcul... more
-
White House invokes executive privilege in EPA inquiry
"I don't think we've had a situation like this since Richard Nixon was president" -from the article.
This article is announcing that President Bush used a special rule to prevent his EPA appointees from handing over questionable documents to an investigation into why they denied the State of California permission to implement its own vehicle emission standards. Standards stricter than the EPA's own.
The first question you should be asking yourself is: why would the federal government want to block a state's right to enact stricter pollution standards? Los Angeles is one of the most vehicle-choked, smoggy cities in America. Our state government is acting in the best interests of its citizens. Why block them?
The second question, especially for Republican party members out there (all three of you on Current.com) is this: State's rights. Isn't that a major tenet of the Republican party? That states should be able to decide for themselves when appropriate? Small government?
Here you have California making a major effort to REDUCE VEHICLE EMISSIONS -- that means reduce air pollution and global warming -- and the Bush administration blocks it.
Why?
When we try to get to the bottom of this, we find George W. Bush invoking a special rule: "executive priviledge" to keep the documents secret.
Smells fishy.
Smells like corruption. "I don't think we've had a situation like this since Richard Nixon was president" -from the article. ... more -
It's Not Race, It's Arugula: Obama's Real Electoral Challenge
On the way to his rendezvous with destiny, Barack Obama consistently lost white voters, especially of the middle and working classes, to Hillary Clinton--voters variously known as Appalachians or Reagan Democrats, rural voters and white ethnics in the industrial states. Because of this, he lost most of the big swing states that a Democrat needs--Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia (which would have made Gore president in 2000 had he won there), that last by a staggering 41 points. Heading into the general election, in which the weight of the black vote will shrink as compared to its importance in the Democratic primaries, this weakness emerged as the prime threat to his promising candidacy and gave birth to two schools of thought on its cause.
School number one thinks it reflects racial hostility that Obama's opponents--first Hillary Clinton and now John McCain and the Republican party--are doing their best to rub raw. This is a case that Democrats have been making for the past 30-plus years, and its most recent airing came in a long piece in the May 19 Newsweek by Evan Thomas and Richard Wolffe. "The real test is yet to come," they warned. "The Republican Party has been successfully scaring voters since 1968, when Richard Nixon built a Silent Majority out of lower-and-middle-class folks frightened or disturbed by hippies and student radicals and blacks rioting. The 2008 race may turn on which party will win the lower and middle-class whites in industrial and border states--the Democrats' base from the New Deal to the 1960s, but 'Reagan Democrats' in most presidential elections since then. It is a sure bet that the GOP will try to paint Obama as 'the other'--as a haughty black intellectual who has Muslim roots." On the way to his rendezvous with destiny, Barack Obama consistently lost white voters, especially of the middle and working classes, ... more -
Warring Campaigns: Obama & McCain Trade Blows Over Iraq
Matt Lauer was in the middle of paying John McCain a tremendous compliment last Wednesday when the Republican nominee interrupted him.
"You showed enormous political courage when you backed President Bush's surge policy in Iraq at a time when--"
"May I correct that statement?"
"Go ahead."
"I advocated the surge policy before President Bush."
"Early on," prompted Lauer.
"Yes."
"Early on. You actually called for more troops way before the president."
"Yes, yes, and said the past strategy was going to fail."
This was more than McCain being boastful. His advisers believe it's a distinction that will help determine whether McCain wins or loses in November.
McCain was an early and forceful advocate of a policy that has helped turn around the Iraq war. The fact that McCain led on Iraq and did not simply support the president is one of the central rationales of his candidacy. It was his commander-in-chief moment. McCain emphasized this throughout the Republican primaries, when he scored his opponents (particularly Mitt Romney) for being insufficiently supportive of the surge, and it helped him win.
Now things get more complicated. The contrast between McCain and Barack Obama is greater than it was with any of his primary opponents, which, paradoxically, makes McCain's task more difficult. The broader electorate is much more skeptical about Iraq than those who voted in Republican primaries. A majority believes the war was a mistake, and most want to get troops home soon, if not immediately.
Matt Lauer was in the middle of paying John McCain a tremendous compliment last Wednesday when the Republican nominee interrupted him.... more -
Drill, McCain, Drill!
For years now, John McCain has warned of the peril to America in sending $400 billion a year to foreign countries in return for oil. He's been loud and relentless on the subject--and wise. "It's a national security issue," he declared last week at a town hall meeting in New York City. Much of the money goes to countries that "do not like us very much," he noted. That was McCain's understated way of saying the beneficiaries include Iran, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia, countries in which anti-American forces find aid and comfort.
So you'd think McCain would favor an unbridled effort to reduce America's dependence on foreign oil. But he doesn't. There's an intellectual and political hole in McCain's position, a lack of coherence that hurts both his presidential campaign and that of Republican congressional candidates.
Republicans have seized on public anger over $4 per gallon gasoline and are calling for domestic oil production in federal lands and offshore areas now closed to exploration and drilling. Since polls show the public agrees with them, Republicans believe "drilling"--the one-word capsulation of the issue--is their strongest political talking point in 2008. Indeed, it may be their only good domestic issue.
But they desperately need a champion to carry their message, someone whom the national media cannot ignore. And that should be McCain, the Republican presidential candidate. Except for one thing: He doesn't go along with their approach in important ways. He sounds, sometimes anyway, like a liberal Democrat or a lobbyist for the environmental movement.
McCain favors increased domestic oil production, but not drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), the barren area with large (and recoverable) oil reserves. President Bush and most Republicans want to open ANWR for drilling and have for years. But McCain is adamant. His aides insist it's a waste of time trying to persuade him to change his mind. He wouldn't want oil companies to drill in ANWR, McCain says, "any more than I would want them to drill in the Grand Canyon or the Everglades."
For years now, John McCain has warned of the peril to America in sending $400 billion a year to foreign countries in return for oil. H... more -
Fuelish Democrats: How Gas Prices Might Work For Republicans
Republicans finally have a winning argument on a big issue, and they'd better make the most of it. It starts with high gasoline prices--the single most infuriating issue to voters these days--but doesn't end there.
Democrats are not being blamed for causing the price of gasoline to reach $4 a gallon, at least by the public and at least for now. Where Democrats have stumbled embarrassingly is in their campaign to persuade the public that the American oil industry is the chief culprit. A Gallup national poll in May found only 20 percent blame the oil companies for gouging, down from 34 percent a year ago.
Where Republicans have succeeded is in selling their solution to soaring gas prices: drilling for oil offshore and on federal lands, areas now off limits. In the Gallup survey, support for drilling in precisely these areas jumped from 41 percent in 2007 to 57 percent in May.
So Republicans have an issue to exploit. And it's one on which Democrats are especially vulnerable because they promised in the 2006 campaign to offer a "common sense" plan to curb gas prices. They have yet to produce one, and the price per gallon of gas has risen by more than $1.60 since Democrats took control of Congress in January 2007.
Democrats have also insisted--unwisely, it turns out--on pushing to enact a global warming bill that would further boost the price of gas and rakbut not in the days of public anger over $4 a gallon gasoline.
As a result, an amazing role reversal occurred on Capitol Hill last week. Republicans, once fearful of the climate change issue, suddenly demanded more debate in Congress on global warming legislation. Democrats, who had earlier promoted the legislation as a top priority, turned squeamish and quickly dropped the issue before it could do serious political harm.
Republicans finally have a winning argument on a big issue, and they'd better make the most of it. It starts with high gasoline prices... more -
Frank Rich debunks Clinton-women-for-McCain myth
Media's talking heads, especially those on cable news shows, will repeat just about any talking point over and over. They're very careful not to let facts get in the way. In last Sunday's NYT, Frank Rich investigated claims that female Clinton supporters are flocking to McCain in droves because they're upset over the misogyny spouted by - gee - that exact same media. The thing is, there's zero evidence to support that claim. Media's talking heads, especially those on cable news shows, will repeat just about any talking point over and over. They're very care... more
-
Historians: Obama will trounce McCain, democratic lanslide win in the fall
One week into the general election, the polls show a dead heat. But many presidential scholars doubt that John McCain stands much of a chance, if any.
Historians belonging to both parties offered a litany of historical comparisons that give little hope to the Republican. Several saw Barack Obama’s prospects as the most promising for a Democrat since Roosevelt trounced Hoover in 1932.
"This should be an overwhelming Democratic victory,” said Allan Lichtman, an American University presidential historian who ran in a Maryland Democratic senatorial primary in 2006. Lichtman, whose forecasting model has correctly predicted the last six presidential popular vote winners, predicts that this year, “Republicans face what have always been insurmountable historical odds.” His system gives McCain a score on par with Jimmy Carter’s in 1980.
“McCain shouldn’t win it,” said presidential historian Joan Hoff, a professor at Montana State University and former president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency. She compared McCain’s prospects to those of Hubert Humphrey, whose 1968 loss to Richard Nixon resulted in large part from the unpopularity of sitting Democratic president Lyndon Johnson.
End of Excerpt
Sources: Politico, http://www.electoral-vote.com/ One week into the general election, the polls show a dead heat. But many presidential scholars doubt that John McCain stands much of a... more -
Closing the "London Loophole"
Democratic Senator, Carl Leven, from Michigan tried to get a bill passed to close the "London Loophole" that allows a lot of shenanigans to go on in the oil industry. The Republicans voted it down. Democratic Senator, Carl Leven, from Michigan tried to get a bill passed to close the "London Loophole" that allows a lot of shenaniga... more
-
The Latino Vote
The fastest growing voting bloc in the US right now is Latinos. Right now it's looking as though Democrats have really captured this group. The fastest growing voting bloc in the US right now is Latinos. Right now it's looking as though Democrats have really captured this g... more
-
Just how stupid are American voters?
Politicians continuously tell us how smart the American people are. How then do we square that with all the evidence that suggests our politics are shallow and dumb? We cannot. Our politics are often dumb because many Americans are not smart about politics. According to Rick Shenkman, author of the new book JUST HOW STUPID ARE WE? Facing the Truth About the American Voter, they don't care about the subject and they don't know much about it.
>Only 2 out of 5 voters can name the three branches of the federal government.
>Only 1 in 7 can find Iraq on a map.
>Only 1 in 5 know that we have 100 US senators.
We have all heard the most common explanations for our broken political system – media manipulation, disingenuous politicians, ambitious CEOs. But in JUST HOW STUPID ARE WE? Shenkman cuts through the Gordian knot of contemporary politics with a shatteringly simple claim: the problem lies not in the machinations of elite business leaders and policy-makers, but in the gross ignorance and irrationality of millions of ordinary voters.
>Although more than 50% of Americans can identify at least two members of the Simpsons Family, only 25% can name more than one right guaranteed by the First Amendment.
>Only 20% of young Americans between the ages 18-34 read a newspaper daily. An astonishingly low 11% report surfing Internet news sites.
>A Washington Post poll in September 2003 found that 70% of Americans believed Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11. A majority continued to believe this even after the 9/11 Commission reported that the claim was groundless.
If facts don't drive our politics, what does? Shenkman says it's myths. Politicians tell people what they want to hear. They tell us we're smart, better than others, and God's favorites. To win us over they pretend to be just like us, belting back shots of whiskey and playing pool, in a crude exploitation of the myth of the common man.
What do you think? ARE American voters stupid about politics? Is that changing with this current election cycle?
Politicians continuously tell us how smart the American people are. How then do we square that with all the evidence that suggests our... more -
if it quacks like a duck...
I am going to quote dick posthumus (former Lt. Governor to Michigan. He said this when he was running for governor a few years ago to... I am going to quote dick posthumus (former Lt. Governor to Michigan. He said this when he was running for governor a few years ago to.... more
-
Why now?? Isn't it a little late?
Question. Why is it when it is almost the end of a President's term in office do ....
-
Republican Propaganda Methods
I believe that this has gone too far. I couldn't find a sufficient link (if anyone can, please, post it! thanks.) but I heard and read about an e-mail sent out by the party saying something to the extent of " Sen. Obama's full name should always be said when adressing him or his beliefs."
Of course, his full name is Barack Hussein Obama... and according to Republicans, the 'Hussein' ringing over and over again will turn-off people supporting Obama.
Another example is the "terrorist fist jab" comment. 'Nuff said.
Furthermore, all the 'elitest' comments are just being repeated to turn off people to Obama.
Stephen Colbert, my personal favorite amongst pundits, made a comment the other night to the extent of
"The people calling Obama an elitist have every right to, because they are the impoverished people in our country that need people who will support them. These people are the politicians and the conservative media."
He also had a comment made about a statement issued by another senator saying "Barack Obama isn't the kind of person you would see at an Applebee's
Salad Bar." Says Stephen, "This is true, especially because Applebee's has no salad bar."
All in all, this is nothing but propaganda, and it's almost 'immature'.
Any comments, or other propaganda being passed around?
Links greatly appreciated! I believe that this has gone too far. I couldn't find a sufficient link (if anyone can, please, post it! thanks.) but I heard and read... more
-
related topics
Republicans
Contributors (521)
Republicans
